PDI 2009 ISDP LAC
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Perit Dial Int 23(5): 481-486 2003
© 2003 International Society for Peritoneal Dialysis
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Grunberg, J
Right arrow Articles by Verocay, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Grunberg, J
Right arrow Articles by Verocay, M.
Peritoneal Dialysis International, Vol 23, Issue 5, 481-486
Copyright © 2003 by International Society for Peritoneal Dialysis


Articles

Peritoneal dialysis in children with spina bifida and ventriculoperitoneal shunt: one center's experience and review of the literature

J Grunberg, A Rebori, and MC Verocay

Pediatric Dialysis Unit, Senniad, Hospital Evangelico, Montevideo, Uruguay. josegrunberg@movinet.com.uy

OBJECTIVE: The goal of this paper was to review the viability of peritoneal dialysis (PD) in patients with spina bifida and/or ventriculoperitoneal shunt (VPS). SETTING: Pediatric dialysis unit in a tertiary-care hospital. DATA SOURCE: The course and outcome in 9 children, 5 from the authors' experience and 4 from reported experience, are analyzed. RESULTS: One patient died of a cause unrelated to PD or VPS, 2 were transferred to hemodialysis because of recurrent peritonitis, 1 discontinued PD transiently, 2 were transplanted, and 3 continue on PD. Six of these 9 children had a functioning VPS, and none presented evidence of ventriculitis or VPS dysfunction, even though 4 had PD-related peritonitis. One child presented with a massive PD-related hydrothorax. CONCLUSIONS: (1) Having a VPS is not an absolute contraindication to PD; the available data support the viability of PD in patients with spina bifida and/or a VPS. (2) If cerebrospinal fluid diversion is needed simultaneously or after starting PD, an extraperitoneal site should be a better choice than VPS. This should avoid the risk of intra- and postoperative infection in the PD catheter secondary to surgical intervention for VPS insertion. (3) Loss of peritoneal function is a potential late risk related to cerebrospinal fluid and PD. (4) Spina bifida patients on PD present specific diagnostic challenges due to overlapping symptoms (e.g., vomiting, abdominal tenderness, fever) secondary to PD- or VPS-related complications (e.g., peritonitis, visceral injury by devices) or primary disease (e.g., neurogenic bladder, pyelonephritis), with inherent risks of delaying adequate treatment. Cloudy peritoneal effluent is an early indication of peritonitis, although it is not specific. (5) Early evaluation by a pediatric surgeon and a neurosurgeon is required for effective management of complications and selection of more efficient individualized therapeutic alternatives. Prompt treatment of complications is crucial. A registry of children with spina bifida on PD and the accumulation of a large population followed up for longer periods will provide an objective assessment of their problems and management.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Nurs EthicsHome page
H. Dogan and S. Sahinoglu
Fetuses with Neural Tube Defects: ethical approaches and the role of health care professionals in Turkish health care institutions
Nursing Ethics, January 1, 2005; 12(1): 59 - 78.
[Abstract] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Multimed Inc. logo
Copyright © 2003 by Multimed Inc.