medigraphic.com
ISSN 0016-3813 (Print)

2018, Number S1

<< Back Next >>

Gac Med Mex 2018; 154 (S1)

Acceso vascular en apoyo renal agudo

Vázquez-Rangel A

Language: Spanish
References: 31
Page: 22-30
PDF size: 370.49 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Vascular access is the first link for renal extracorporeal support therapy. Unlike renal replacement therapy for patients with end-stage renal disease where the arteriovenous fistula is the first option, followed by the tunneled catheter, in patients with acute kidney injury a temporary catheter is the first choice. The present article constitutes a narrative review summarizing the studies that analyze the choice, placement and care of temporary vascular access for acute renal support. In patients who have a pre-existing arteriovenous fistula, their puncture in patients with hemodynamic instability carries risks and cannot be recommended. The use of tunneled catheter as first option implies a complex, time-consuming procedure with higher cost that also limits its recommendation. The change of catheters by metal guide has shown to be a safe method in the absence of infection. Femoral access has been shown not to be inferior to right jugular access, while left jugular access reduces the life of the circuit and should be considered as a fourth option after right jugular, right femoral and left femoral sites. The length of the access should be evaluated according to the insertion site, while 20 cm catheters are usually suitable for right jugular puncture, the left jugular usually requires 25 cm for achieving the position inside the right atrium. On the other hand, the femoral access increases its performance with lengths of 25-35 cm. The low posterior jugular approach is considered a simple, safe technique that allows up to 5 cm further towards the right atrium. The interaction between central catheters must be anticipated or evaluated because of the risk of aspiration of infusions by the extracorporeal circuit. The use of heparin 1000 U/ml for sealing the ports reduces the risk of bleeding compared to heparin 5000 U/ml. The reasoning on the evolution of catheters in structural coating materials, the decision on using a suture, the differences among dressings or securement devices, and the controversy over the use of antibiotics for sealing ports and for dressings are also discussed. The review includes the positions of the guidelines by the Kidney Dialysis Improving Global Outcomes and the European Renal Best Practice, in addition to the information available mainly on the consensus of the acute dialysis quality initiative, systematic reviews, meta-analysis and controlled clinical trials.


REFERENCES

  1. KDIGO Clinical Practice Guideline for Acute Kidney Injury. Section 5: Dialysis Interventions for Treatment of AKI. Kidney Int Suppl. 2012;2(1):89-115.

  2. Jörres A, John S, Lewington A, ter Wee PM, Vanholder R, Van Biesen W, et al. A European Renal Best Practice (ERBP) position statement on the Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) Clinical Practice Guidelines on Acute Kidney Injury: part 2: renal replacement therapy. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2013;28(12):2940-5.

  3. Oliver MJ, Callery SM, Thorpe KE, Schwab SJ, Churchill DN. Risk of bacteremia from temporary hemodialysis catheters by site of insertion and duration of use: a prospective study. Kidney Int. 2000;58(6):2543-5.

  4. Casey J, Davies J, Balshaw-Greer A, Taylor N, Crowe AV, McClelland P. Inserting tunnelled hemodialysis catheters using elective guidewire exchange from nontunnelled catheters: is there a greater risk of infection when compared with new-site replacement? Hemodial Int. 2008; 12(1):52-4.

  5. Coupez E, Timsit JF, Ruckly S, Schwebel C, Gruson D, Canet E, et al. Guidewire exchange vs. new site replacement for temporary dialysis catheter insertion in ICU patients: is there a greater risk of colonization or dysfunction? Crit Care. 2016;20(1):230.

  6. Rabindranath KS, Kumar E, Shail R, Vaux E. Use of real-time ultrasound guidance for the placement of hemodialysis catheters: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Am J Kidney Dis. 2011;58(6):964-70.

  7. Tammam TF, El-Shafey EM, Tammam HF. Ultrasound-guided internal jugular vein access: comparison between short axis and long axis techniques. Saudi J Kidney Dis Transpl. 2013;24(4):707-13.

  8. Schillinger F, Schillinger D, Montagnac R, Milcent T. Post catheterisation vein stenosis in haemodialysis: comparative angiographic study of 50 subclavian and 50 internal jugular accesses. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 1991;6(10):722-4.

  9. Parienti JJ, Thirion M, Megarbane B, Souweine B, Ouchikhe A, Polito A, et al. Femoral vs. jugular venous catheterization and risk of nosocomial events in adults requiring acute renal replacement therapy: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2008;299(20):2413-22.

  10. Parienti JJ, Megarbane B, Fischer MO, Lautrette A, Gazui N, Marin N, et al. Catheter dysfunction and dialysis performance according to vascular access among 736 critically ill adults requiring renal replacement therapy: a randomized controlled study. Crit Care Med. 2010;38(4):1118-25.

  11. Dugue AE, Levesque SP, Fischer MO, Souweine B, Mira JP, Megarbane B, et al. Vascular access sites for acute renal replacement in intensive care units. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2012;7(1):70-7.

  12. Marik PE, Flemmer M, Harrison W. The risk of catheter-related bloodstream infection with femoral venous catheters as compared to subclavian and internal jugular venous catheters: a systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis. Crit Care Med. 2012;40(8):2479-85.

  13. Annigeri RA, Ostermann M, Tolwani A, Vázquez-Rangel A, Ponce D, Bagga A, et al. Renal support for acute kidney injury in the developing World. Kidney Int Rep. 2017;2(4):559-78.

  14. Mathur M, D’Souza AV, Prasad D, Garsa R, Bansal N, Jhorawat R, et al. A comparative study of central versus posterior approach for internal jugular hemodialysis catheter insertion. Indian J Nephrol. 2015; 25(5):265-8.

  15. Morgan D, Ho K, Murray C, Davies H, Louw J. A randomized trial of catheters of different lengths to achieve right atrium versus superior vena cava placement for continuous renal replacement therapy. Am J Kidney Dis. 2012;60(2):272-9.

  16. Engstrom BI, Horvath JJ, Stewart JK, Sydnor RH, Miller MJ, Smith TP, et al. Tunneled internal jugular hemodialysis catheters: impact of laterality and tip position on catheter dysfunction and infection rates. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2013;24(9):1295-302.

  17. Kam KY, Mari JM, Wigmore TJ. Adjacent central venous catheters can result in immediate aspiration of infused drugs during renal replacement therapy. Anaesthesia. 2012;67(2):115-21.

  18. Contreras G, Liu PY, Elzinga L, Anger MS, Lee J, Robert N, et al. A multicenter, prospective, randomized, comparative evaluation of dual- versus triple-lumen catheters for hemodialysis and apheresis in 485 patients. Am J Kidney Dis. 2003;42(2):315-24.

  19. Leblanc M, Fedak S, Mokris G, Paganini EP. Blood recirculation in temporary central catheters for acute hemodialysis. Clin Nephrol. 1996; 45(5):315-9.

  20. Little MA, Conlon PJ, Walshe JJ. Access recirculation in temporary hemodialysis catheters as measured by the saline dilution technique. Am J Kidney Dis. 2000;36(6):1135-9.

  21. Bellomo R, Martensson J, Lo S, Kaukonen KM, Cass A, Gallagher M; RENAL study investigators; Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Clinical Trials Group. Femoral access and delivery of continuous renal replacement therapy dose. Blood Purif. 2016;41(1-3):11-7.

  22. Kim IB, Fealy N, Baldwin I, Bellomo R. Insertion side, body position and circuit life during continuous renal replacement therapy with femoral vein access. Blood Purif. 2011;31(1-3):42-6.

  23. Weijmer MC, Vervloet M, Gter Wee PM. Prospective follow-up of a novel design haemodialysis catheter; lower infection rates and improved survival. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2008;23(3):977-83.

  24. Verbeke F, Haug U, Dhondt A, Beck W, Schnell A, Dietrich R, et al. The role of polymer surface degradation and barium sulphate release in the pathogenesis of catheter-related infection. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2010;25(4):1207-13.

  25. Lai NM, Chaiyakunapruk N, Lai NA, O’Riordan E, Pau WS, Saint S. Catheter impregnation, coating or bonding for reducing central venous catheter-related infections in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016;3:CD007878.

  26. Wang Y, Ivany JN, Perkovic V, Gallagher MP, Woodward M, Jardine MJ. Anticoagulants and antiplatelet agents for preventing central venous haemodialysis catheter malfunction in patients with end-stage kidney disease. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016;4:CD009631.

  27. Hu HH, Hsu CY, Fang HC, Lee PT, Chen CL, Chang TY, et al. Low-dose heparin retention in temporary hemodialysis double-lumen catheter does not increase catheter occlusion and might reduce risk of bleeding. Blood Purif. 2011;32(3):232-7.

  28. Zhao Y, Li Z, Zhang L, Yang J, Yang Y, Tang Y, Fu P. Citrate versus heparin lock for hemodialysis catheters: a systematic review and meta- analysis of randomized controlled trials. Am J Kidney Dis. 2014;63(3):479-90.

  29. Dogra GK, Herson H, Hutchison B, Irish AB, Heath CH, Golledge C, et al. Prevention of tunneled hemodialysis catheter-related infections using catheter-restricted filling with gentamicin and citrate: a randomized controlled study. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2002;13(8):2133-9.

  30. Ullman AJ, Cooke ML, Mitchell M, Lin F, New K, Long DA, et al. Dressings and securement devices for central venous catheters (CVC). Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015(9):CD010367.

  31. Mimoz O, Lucet JC, Kerforne T, Pascal J, Souweine B, Goudet V, et al. Skin antisepsis with chlorhexidine-alcohol versus povidone iodine-alcohol, with and without skin scrubbing, for prevention of intravascular-catheter- related infection (CLEAN): an open-label, multicentre, randomised, controlled, two-by-two factorial trial. Lancet. 2015;386(10008): 2069-77.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com