Peritonitis Prevention in CAPD: Efficacy of a Y-Connector and Disinfectant

  • A. Cantaluppi
  • A. Scalamogna
  • L. Guerra
  • C. Castelnovo
  • G. Graziani
  • C. Ponticelli


An open trial of the Y connector system for peritoneal dialysis has been carried out in 62 patients and the results compared to those in 18 patients using the standard spike connector for dialysis fluid exchanges. The incidence of peritonitis was lower (14.5%) with the Y connector, and the interval until peritonitis occurred was longer. Diabetic patients had a higher frequency of infection. When this group was excluded the peritonitis rate was one episode every 110.2 patient-months in the Y connector group. Technical accidents with the system were infrequent and inconsequential except for transient pain. CAPD treatment was continued by 80% of these patients after 10.1 months.


Peritoneal Dialysis Continuous Ambulatory Peritoneal Dialysis Dialysis Fluid Outlet Tube Miliary Tuberculosis 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Oreopoulos DG, Khanna R, Williams P, and Vas SI: Continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis-1981. Nephron 30: 293, 1982PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Levey AS, Harrington JT: Continuous peritoneal dialysis for chronic renal failure. Medicine 61: 330, 1982PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Wing AJ, Broyer M, Brunner FP, Brynger H, Challah S, Donckerwolcke RA, Gretz N, Jacobs C, Kramer P, and Selwood NH: Combined report on regular dialysis and transplantation in Europe, XIII, 1982. Proc Eur Dial Transplant Assoc 20: 5, 1983Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bazzato G, Coli U, Landini S, Fraeasso A, Moracchiello P, Righetto F, and Scanferla F: Continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis with double bag system: 40 months experience of better patient rehabilitation. In 54th Hahnemann Symposium (Venice, 1982 )Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Slingeneyer A, and Mion C: Peritonitis prevention in continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis: Long term efficacy of a bacteriological filter. Proc Eur Dial Transplant Assoc 19: 388, 1982Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Oreopoulos DG, Vas SI, and Khanna R: Prevention of peritonitis during continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis. Peritoneal Dial Bull 3: S18, 1983Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Buoncristiani U, Bianchi P, Cozzari M, Carobi C, Quintaliani G, and Barbarossa D: A new safe simple connection system for CAPD. Int J Nephrol Urol Androl 1: 50, 1980Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Buoncristiani U, Cozzari M, Quintaliani G, and Carobi C: Abatement of exogenous peritonitis risk using the Perugia CAPD system. Dial Transplant 12: 14, 1983Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Maiorca R, Cantaluppi A, Cancarini GC, Scalamogna A, Broccoli R, Grazianig, Brasa S, and Ponticelli C: Prospective controlled trial of a Y-connector and disinfectant to prevent peritonitis in continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis. Lancet 2: 642, 1983PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Buoncristiani U, Bianchi P, Barzi AM, Quintialiani G, Cozzari M, and Carobi C: An ideal disinfectant for peritoneal dialysis (high efficient, easy to handle and innocuous). Int J Nephrol Urol Androl 1: 45, 1980Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Peto R, Pike MC, Armitage P, Breslow NE, Cox DR, Howard SV, Mantel N, McPherson K, Peto J, and Smith PG: Design and analysis of randomized clinical trials requiring prolonged observation of each patient. II. Analysis and examples. Br J Cancer 35: 1, 1977PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Nolph KD, Prowant B, Sorkin MI, and Gloor H: The incidence and characteristics of peritonitis in the fourth year of a continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis program. Peritoneal Dial Bull 1: 50, 1981Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Khanna R, Oreopoulos DG, Dombros N, Vas S, Williams P, Meema HE, Hudson H, Ogilvie R, Zellerman G, Roncari DAK, Clayton S, and Izatt S: Continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) after three years: Still a promising treatment. Peritoneal Dial Bull 1: 24, 1981Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Prowant B, Ryan L, and Nolph KD: Six years of experience with peritonitis in a CAPD program. Peritoneal Dial Bull 3: 199, 1983Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Williams CC, and the University of Toronto Collaborative Dialysis Group: CAPD in Toronto—An overview. Peritoneal Dial Bull 3: S6, 1983Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Amair P, Khanna R, Leibel B, Pierratos A, Vas A, Meema E, Blair G, Chisolm L, Vas M, Zingg W, Digenis G, and Oreopoulos D: Continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis in diabetics with end-stage renal disease. N Engl J Med 306: 625, 1982PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Flynn CT: Long-term continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis. Proc Eur Dial Transplant Assoc 20: 700, 1983PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Rottembourg J, El Shahat Y, Agrafiotis A, Thuillier Y, de Groc F, Jacobs C, and Legrain M: Continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis in insulin-dependent diabetic patients: A 40-month experience. Kidney Int 23: 40, 1983PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1986

Authors and Affiliations

  • A. Cantaluppi
    • 1
  • A. Scalamogna
    • 1
  • L. Guerra
    • 1
  • C. Castelnovo
    • 1
  • G. Graziani
    • 1
  • C. Ponticelli
    • 1
  1. 1.Divisione di NefrologiaOspedale Maggiore PoliclinicoMilanoItaly

Personalised recommendations