AJR Women's Imaging Online
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Garofalo, R. S.
Right arrow Articles by Leef, J. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Garofalo, R. S.
Right arrow Articles by Leef, J. A.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?

American Journal of Roentgenology, Vol 173, 155-158, Copyright © 1999 by American Roentgen Ray Society

ARTICLES

Exchange of poorly functioning tunneled permanent hemodialysis catheters

RS Garofalo, GX Zaleski, JM Lorenz, B Funaki, JD Rosenblum and JA Leef
Radiology Associates of the Fox Valley, Oshkosh, WI 54901, USA.

OBJECTIVE: The usefulness of exchanging poorly functioning tunneled permanent hemodialysis catheters in patients with end-stage renal disease was evaluated. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed case histories of 51 consecutive patients who underwent 88 catheter exchanges because of poor flow rates. All hemodialysis catheters were initially placed by the radiology service using image guidance. Catheter exchanges were performed through the existing subcutaneous tract over two stiff hydrophilic guidewires and without additional interventions such as fibrin sheath stripping or venoplasty. Life table analysis was performed to evaluate catheter patency rates after initial placement (primary patency) and after multiple exchanges (secondary patency). RESULTS: The technical success rate for hemodialysis catheter exchange was 100%. Primary catheter patency was 42% at 60 days and 16% at 120 days. Secondary patency was 92% at 60 days and 82% at 120 days. The cumulative infection rate was 1.1 per 1000 catheter days. No complications from the procedure occurred. CONCLUSION: Catheter exchange is an effective means of prolonging catheter patency in patients with end-stage renal disease and limited central venous access.
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 CJASNHome page
M. J. Oliver, D. C. Mendelssohn, R. R. Quinn, E. P. Richardson, D. K. Rajan, R. A. Pugash, J. A. Hiller, A. J. Kiss, and C. E. Lok
Catheter Patency and Function after Catheter Sheath Disruption: A Pilot Study
Clin. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol., November 1, 2007; 2(6): 1201 - 1206.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
B. Funaki
Central Venous Access: A Primer for the Diagnostic Radiologist
Am. J. Roentgenol., August 1, 2002; 179(2): 309 - 318.
[Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1999 by the American Roentgen Ray Society.