{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02620967741935484, 'fraction_numerical': 0.011088709677419355, 'mean_word_length': 6.042553191489362, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 1, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Randomized Prospective Comparison of Laparoscopic and Open Peritoneal Dialysis Catheter Insertion

Objective To compare laparoscopic and conventional peritoneal dialysis catheter insertion with respect to post operative discomfort, complication rates, and catheter survival. Design Randomized prospective study. Setting Tertiary referral renal unit. Patients Fifty patients commencing peritoneal dialysis. Intervention Catheters were implanted laparoscopically or by a conventional surgical technique. Main Outcome Measures The duration of surgery, hospital stay, pain scores, and analgesic requirements were recorded. Complications (early/late) and catheter survival were compared. Results The conventional procedure was faster than the laparoscopic (14.3 vs 21.9 minutes, p < 0.0001). There was no difference in any other parameter assessed. Conclusions The data suggest that the insertion techniques are equivalent, and that laparoscopic insertion does not reduce early complication rates.