Scholarlink

Purpose <p>This study evaluates catheter failure rates between a helical-tip catheter and a traditional split-tip catheter among intensive care unit (ICU) patients undergoing tunneled dialysis catheter (TDC) placement.</p> Materials and methods <p>We analyzed 1734 TDCs placed over seven years in a retrospective fashion, focusing on 340 catheters used in an ICU setting. Of these, 112 were VectorFlow catheters (32.9%), and 228 were Ash-Split catheters (67.1%). Catheter failure rates due to malfunction or infection were assessed using Kaplan–Meier analysis, while contributing factors were evaluated using Cox proportional hazards modeling.</p> Results <p>Within 90&#xa0;days, 34.8% of patients experienced catheter failure. The VectorFlow catheter demonstrated superior unassisted patency at 30, 60, 90, and 180&#xa0;days compared to the Ash-Split catheter (87.4 ± 3.6%, 78.0 ± 5.1%, 75.1 ± 5.0% and 60.1 ± 8.2% compared with 75.0 ± 3.3%, 62.8 ± 4.1%, 60.7 ± 4.2% and 44.3 ± 5.5% respectively, <i>P</i> = 0.022). Adjusted hazard ratios indicated Ash-Split catheters were nearly twice as likely to fail according to both univariate (1.72, <i>P</i> = 0.024) and multivariate (1.89, <i>P</i> = 0.017) modeling.</p> Conclusion <p>The findings suggest that the VectorFlow catheter demonstrates significantly better primary unassisted patency over the Ash-Split design in ICU settings, supporting its preferential use.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Tunneled dialysis catheter placement in intensive care unit patients: influence of catheter tip design on clinical performance

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年9月29日

查看全文
  • Alexey Gurevich,
  • Gregory J. Nadolski,
  • Ansar Z. Vance,
  • Ryan-Assaad El-Ghazal,
  • Raphael Cohen,
  • Timothy W. I. Clark,
  • Matthew L. Hung

摘要

Purpose

This study evaluates catheter failure rates between a helical-tip catheter and a traditional split-tip catheter among intensive care unit (ICU) patients undergoing tunneled dialysis catheter (TDC) placement.

Materials and methods

We analyzed 1734 TDCs placed over seven years in a retrospective fashion, focusing on 340 catheters used in an ICU setting. Of these, 112 were VectorFlow catheters (32.9%), and 228 were Ash-Split catheters (67.1%). Catheter failure rates due to malfunction or infection were assessed using Kaplan–Meier analysis, while contributing factors were evaluated using Cox proportional hazards modeling.

Results

Within 90 days, 34.8% of patients experienced catheter failure. The VectorFlow catheter demonstrated superior unassisted patency at 30, 60, 90, and 180 days compared to the Ash-Split catheter (87.4 ± 3.6%, 78.0 ± 5.1%, 75.1 ± 5.0% and 60.1 ± 8.2% compared with 75.0 ± 3.3%, 62.8 ± 4.1%, 60.7 ± 4.2% and 44.3 ± 5.5% respectively, P = 0.022). Adjusted hazard ratios indicated Ash-Split catheters were nearly twice as likely to fail according to both univariate (1.72, P = 0.024) and multivariate (1.89, P = 0.017) modeling.

Conclusion

The findings suggest that the VectorFlow catheter demonstrates significantly better primary unassisted patency over the Ash-Split design in ICU settings, supporting its preferential use.