Indian Journal of Nephrology About us |  Subscription |  e-Alerts  | Feedback | Login   
  Print this page Email this page   Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size
 Home | Current Issue | Archives| Ahead of print | Search |Instructions |  Editorial Board  

Users Online:764

Official publication of the Indian Society of Nephrology
 ~   Next article
 ~   Previous article
 ~   Table of Contents

 ~   Similar in PUBMED
 ~  Search Pubmed for
 ~  Search in Google Scholar for
 ~Related articles
 ~   Citation Manager
 ~   Access Statistics
 ~   Reader Comments
 ~   Email Alert *
 ~   Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)

 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded214    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal


Year : 2015  |  Volume : 25  |  Issue : 5  |  Page : 265-268

A comparative study of central versus posterior approach for internal jugular hemodialysis catheter insertion

Department of Nephrology, SMS Hospital and Medical College, Jaipur, Rajasthan, India

Correspondence Address:
M Mathur
Department of Nephrology, SMS Hospital and Medical College, Jaipur, Rajasthan
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/0971-4065.151356

Rights and Permissions

Internal jugular (IJ) catheter insertion for hemodialysis (HD) is an indispensable procedure in the management of patients with renal failure. The central approach is favored over posterior approach to insert IJ catheters. There are no studies comparing the outcomes between the two approaches. The aim of this study was to compare central approach with posterior approach for IJ HD catheter insertion and to analyze various outcomes like procedure-related complication rates, catheter insertion failure rates, interruptions during dialysis due to blood flow obstruction and catheter infection rates between the two methods among patients receiving HD. All patients requiring IJ HD catheter insertion during a 1-month period were randomly assigned to undergo catheter insertion via either conventional central approach or posterior approach. Patients were followed-up till the removal of the catheter. Among 104 patients included in the study, 54 were assigned to the central approach group and 50 to the posterior approach group. The central approach group had higher rate of procedure-related complications (14.81% vs. 6%, P = 0.04). Catheter insertion failure rates were marginally higher in posterior approach group (20% vs. 12.96%, P = 0.07). One or more instance of interruption during HD due to obstruction in blood flow was more common in posterior approach (46% vs. 9.25%, P < 0.01). Catheter infection rates were similar between the two groups; 16.66% ( n = 9) in central group vs. 14% ( n = 7) in posterior group. Posterior approach is a reasonable alternative to conventional central approach in IJ cannulation for HD catheter. It is, however, associated with a significantly high rate of interruption in HD blood flow and catheter insertion failure rates. The posterior approach can be used in patients with local exit site infection or in failed attempts to cannulate IJ vein via the conventional central approach.


Print this article     Email this article

Indian Journal of Nephrology
Published by Wolters Kluwer - Medknow
Online since 20th Sept '07