TY - JOUR
T1 - A randomized, prospective evaluation of the Tesio, Ash split, and Opti-flow hemodialysis catheters
AU - Richard, H. M.
AU - Hastings, G. S.
AU - Boyd-Kranis, R. L.
AU - Murthy, R.
AU - Radack, D. M.
AU - Santilli, J. G.
AU - Ostergaard, C.
AU - Coldwell, D. M.
N1 - Copyright:
Copyright 2017 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
PY - 2001
Y1 - 2001
N2 - PURPOSE: A randomized, prospective evaluation of three high-flow hemodialysis catheters. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ninety-four patients were randomly assigned 113 Tesio, Ash split, and Opti-flow catheters from December 1998 through June 1999. Insertion times, procedural complications, and ease of insertion were recorded. Mean catheter flow rates were recorded at first dialysis, 30 days, and 90 days. Patency, catheter survival, and catheter-related infections were evaluated. RESULTS: Thirty-eight Ash split, 39 Opti-flow, and 36 Tesio catheters were placed. Tesio mean insertion time (41.5 min) was significantly longer than Ash split (29.4 min) or Opti-flow (29.6 min) (P = .004). There were four complications related to Tesio catheters (three cases of pericatheter bleeding, one air embolism), one related to an Opti-flow catheter (pericatheter bleeding), and zero related to Ash split catheters. Opti-flow and Ash split catheters were significantly easier to insert than Tesio catheters (P = .041). Mean flow rates were not significantly different among the catheters initially (P = .112), at 30 days (P = .281), or at 90 days (P = .112). Catheter-related infection rates per 100 catheter days were 0.12 for Ash split, 0.35 for Opti-flow, and 0.14 for Tesio. Median catheter survival was 302 days for Ash split, 176 days for Opti-flow, and 228 days for Tesio. CONCLUSIONS: Opti-Flow and Ash split catheters were faster and easier to place than Tesio catheters. There was no difference in hemodialysis flow rates or catheter survival.
AB - PURPOSE: A randomized, prospective evaluation of three high-flow hemodialysis catheters. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ninety-four patients were randomly assigned 113 Tesio, Ash split, and Opti-flow catheters from December 1998 through June 1999. Insertion times, procedural complications, and ease of insertion were recorded. Mean catheter flow rates were recorded at first dialysis, 30 days, and 90 days. Patency, catheter survival, and catheter-related infections were evaluated. RESULTS: Thirty-eight Ash split, 39 Opti-flow, and 36 Tesio catheters were placed. Tesio mean insertion time (41.5 min) was significantly longer than Ash split (29.4 min) or Opti-flow (29.6 min) (P = .004). There were four complications related to Tesio catheters (three cases of pericatheter bleeding, one air embolism), one related to an Opti-flow catheter (pericatheter bleeding), and zero related to Ash split catheters. Opti-flow and Ash split catheters were significantly easier to insert than Tesio catheters (P = .041). Mean flow rates were not significantly different among the catheters initially (P = .112), at 30 days (P = .281), or at 90 days (P = .112). Catheter-related infection rates per 100 catheter days were 0.12 for Ash split, 0.35 for Opti-flow, and 0.14 for Tesio. Median catheter survival was 302 days for Ash split, 176 days for Opti-flow, and 228 days for Tesio. CONCLUSIONS: Opti-Flow and Ash split catheters were faster and easier to place than Tesio catheters. There was no difference in hemodialysis flow rates or catheter survival.
KW - Catheters and catheterization
KW - Dialysis
KW - Technology
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0035070052&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0035070052&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/S1051-0443(07)61880-6
DO - 10.1016/S1051-0443(07)61880-6
M3 - Article
C2 - 11287528
AN - SCOPUS:0035070052
SN - 1051-0443
VL - 12
SP - 431
EP - 435
JO - Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology
JF - Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology
IS - 4
ER -