Laparoscopic versus traditional peritoneal dialysis catheter insertion: a meta analysis

Abstract

Objective: The objective of this study is to compare the catheter-related complications as well as catheter survival between laparoscopic and traditional surgery in peritoneal dialysis catheter insertion. Results: Five randomized controlled trials and 11 cohort studies were identified. Meta-analysis showed laparoscopic catheter is superior to traditional surgery in terms of controlling catheter migration (OR 0.17, 95% CI 0.08–0.33; p < 0.00001) and catheter survival rate (1-year survival rate: OR 3.05, 95% CI 1.72–5.41, p = 0.0001; 2-year survival rate: OR 2. 07, 95% CI 1.29–3.33, p = 0.0001), but slightly increases the risk of bleeding (OR 2.13, 95% CI 1.07–4.23, p = 0.03). The two groups were not significantly different in other catheter-related complications. As regards the quality of the analysis, only the migration analysis ranked A-level, while the rest fell into Class B or C. The overall research quality was moderate. Conclusion: Laparoscopic surgery is superior to traditional surgery on reducing catheter migration and prolonging catheter survival rate according to our analysis.

• Catheter survival
• peritoneal dialysis
• complication
• laparoscopy
• peritoneal dialysis catheter insertion

Acknowledgements

The authors thank Dr. Tang Wen of Peking University for her work of revising this paper.

Declaration of interest

The authors report that they have no conflicts of interest.