Abstract

Context: Due to its antithrombotic and antibacterial properties, 4% sodium citrate is an alternative to unfractionated heparin in locking hemodialysis catheters. Our study aims to assess the clinical efficacy, risks and cost of the 4% sodium citrate lock compared to the heparin lock for hemodialysis catheters.

Methodology: This is a single-center, prospective, randomized study. The patients were divided into two groups in which the catheters were locked either with 4% sodium citrate solution or with unfractionated heparin; this. We studied thrombotic, infectious, hemorrhagic complications and the cost of each type of lock.

Results: 47 patients made up our population. 23 catheters had 4% sodium citrate as their lock and 22 unfractionated heparin. There was no significant difference in thrombotic catheter dysfunction (p = 0.4) as well as in the occurrence of infectious events (p = 0.7). No local hemorrhagic complication was found in the 4% citrate lock group. The citrate lock allowed a saving of more than 100% compared to heparin.

Conclusion: 4% sodium citrate is as effective as heparin in maintaining catheter patency. It is less expensive than the latter and would lead to fewer local bleeding complications. However, its effectiveness in preventing catheter-related infections remains to be demonstrated. there was no significant difference in thrombotic catheter dysfunction (p = 0.4) as well as in the occurrence of infectious events (p = 0.7). No local hemorrhagic complication was found in the 4% citrate lock group. The citrate lock allowed a saving of more than 100% compared to heparin.

Keywords: Quality; Assurance; Standards; Bench Marking; Medical; Health; Neurosciences; Neurosurgery

References

1. Combe Ch., et al. “Data on the use of central venous catheters in chronic hemodialysis”. Nephrology8 (2001): 379-384.
2. Jean G. “Incidence and risk factors for infections from hemodialysis catheters”. Nephrologie 8 (2001): 443-448.
3. Linda Grudzinski., et al. “Sodium citrate 4% locking solution for central venous dialysis catheters-an effective, more cost efficient alternative to heparin”. Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation 2 (2007): 471-476.
4. Updating of the definition of nosocomial infections. Ministry of Health, Youth and Sports. Technical committee for nosocomial infections and healthcare-related infections (2007).
5. Malik Touam. “Vascular access for hemodialysis: central venous catheters”. Therapeutic Medicine 4 (1998): 571-577.
6. Jennifer M Macrae., et al. “Citrate 4% versus Heparin and the Reduction of Thrombosis Study”. Journal of the American Society of Nephrology 3 (2008): 369-374.
7. M Weijmer., et al. “Randomized clinical trial comparison of 30% trisodium citrate and heparin as catheter blocking solution in hemodialysis patients”. Journal of the American Society of Nephrology 16 (2005): 2769-2777.
8. Plamondon I., et al. “Randomized cross over comparison of 4% sodium citrate and heparin in bilum catheter lock in hemodialysis”. Journal of the American Society of Nephrology 12 (2005).

Citation

Citation: Daniel Tony Eyeni Sinomono. “Contribution of 4% Sodium Citrate in Hemodialysis Catheter Lock”.Acta Scientific Medical Sciences 5.2 (2021): 80-84.

Copyright

Copyright: © 2021 Daniel Tony Eyeni Sinomono. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.