Background: The purpose of this study is to compare a new temporary triple-lumen catheter (TLC) for dialysis that has a third lumen devoted to fluid and medication administration or blood sampling with a marketed dual-lumen catheter (DLC). Methods: Four hundred eighty-five patients referred for acute hemodialysis or apheresis were randomly assigned to either a TLC or DLC in a multicenter, prospective, randomized trial. Results: Analysis of blood flow rates was completed on 464 patients (228 patients, DLC; 236 patients, TLC) with a total of 1,681 hemodialysis (808 treatments, DLC; 873 treatments, TLC) and 82 apheresis treatments (37 treatments, DLC; 45 treatments, TLC). During hemodialysis, a median achieved flow rate (AFR) of 267 mL/min was realized for both groups (P = 0.58). During apheresis, a median AFR of 72.5 mL/min (range, 50 to 150 mL/min) was achieved in the DLC group, and 87 mL/min (range, 60 to 150 mL/min), in the TLC group (P = 0.14). Three hundred ninety-three patients (193 patients, DLC; 200 patients, TLC) had blood and catheter tip cultures performed on removal, and catheter-related blood-stream infection (CRBSI) status was determined. Thirty-one patients (7.9%) had a CRBSI: 16 patients (8.3%), DLC; and 15 patients (7.5%), TLC (P= 0.77). Incidence densities of CRBSI were 12.4/1,000 DLC-days and 10.2/1,000 TLC-days (P = 0.59). The CRBSI incidence of 18.2/1,000 catheter-days for femoral sites was significantly greater than the 7/1,000 catheter-days for jugular sites (P = 0.02) and 6.6/1,000 catheter-days for combined jugular and subclavian sites (P = 0.01). In multivariate analysis, antibiotic use was the only factor related to CRBSI (odds ratio, 0.30; 95% confidence interval, 0.12 to 0.76). There were no statistically significant differences in rates of other complications between the 2 catheters. Conclusion: Results show that the new TLC is similar to the marketed DLC.
- Hemodialysis (HD)
- Randomized clinical trial
- Temporary triple-lumen catheter (TLC)
ASJC Scopus subject areas