Download PDF

Plos One

Publication date: 2021-05-20
Volume: 16
Publisher: Public Library of Science (PLoS)

Author:

Bonkain, Florence
Stolear, Jean-Claude ; Catalano, Concetta ; Vandervelde, Dominique ; Treille, Serge ; Couttenye, Marie M ; Dhondt, Annemieke ; Libertalis, Mark ; Allamani, Mandelina ; Madhoun, Philippe ; Van Craenenbroeck, Amaryllis H ; Vanommeslaeghe, Floris ; Van Hulle, Freya ; Durieux, Philippe ; Van Limberghen, Ingrid ; Tielemans, Christian ; Wissing, Karl Martin

Keywords:

4-PERCENT, ANTIMICROBIAL ACTIVITY, COMPLICATIONS, DIALYSIS CATHETERS, HEMODIALYSIS VASCULAR ACCESS, HEPARIN, Multidisciplinary Sciences, REDUCTION, Science & Technology, Science & Technology - Other Topics, THROMBOSIS, TRISODIUM CITRATE, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Catheterization, Central Venous, Central Venous Catheters, Double-Blind Method, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Prospective Studies, Renal Dialysis, Taurine, Thiadiazines, Thrombosis, Urokinase-Type Plasminogen Activator, General Science & Technology

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: The efficacy and cost-effectiveness of prophylactic thrombolytic locks in hemodialysis patients at high-risk of thrombotic dialysis catheter dysfunction is uncertain. We investigated this question in a double-blinded randomized controlled study. METHODS: Prevalent hemodialysis patients from 8 Belgian hemodialysis units, with ≥2 separate episodes of thrombotic dysfunction of their tunneled cuffed catheter during the 6 months before inclusion, were randomized to either: taurolidine heparin locks thrice weekly (control arm) or the same locks twice a week combined with taurolidine urokinase locks once a week before the longest interval without HD (TaurolockU arm). The primary efficacy outcome was the incidence rate of catheter thrombotic dysfunction requiring thrombolytic locks to restore function. RESULTS: 68 hemodialysis patients (32 controls, 36 urokinase) were followed during 9875 catheter days between May 2015 and June 2017. Incidence rate of thrombotic catheter dysfunction was 4.8 in TaurolockU vs 12.1/1000 catheter days in control group (rate ratio 0.39; 95%CI 0.23-0.64). 15/36 (42%) catheters in the treatment group required at least one therapeutic urokinase lock vs 23/32 (72%) in the control group (P = 0.012). The two groups did not differ significantly in catheter-related bloodstream infection and combined cost of prophylactic and therapeutic catheter locks. The TaurolockU group had a numerically higher number of episodes of refractory thrombosis. CONCLUSIONS: Prophylactic use of urokinase locks is highly effective in reducing the number of thrombotic catheter dysfunctions in catheters with a history of recurring dysfunction. Prophylactic use of urokinase locks did not reduce the overall costs associated with catheter locks and was associated with a numerically higher number of episodes of refractory thrombosis. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02036255.