Right- Versus Left-Sided Approach for Transhepatic Tunneled Catheter Placement: Is There a Difference?

Objective We aimed to compare the technical difficulties, complications, long-term efficacy, and risks between right- and left-sided approach transhepatic tunneled catheterization. Methods We retrospectively evaluated transhepatic tunneled catheter placement cases in our institution between May 2012 and November 2019. Demographic and procedural parameters were recorded. Statistical tests were used to compare the complication rates of right- and left-sided approach. Furthermore, Cox regression analyses were used to investigate the relationship between functional catheter days and included parameters. Results A total of 83 procedures were performed in 46 patients, with a female to male ratio of 1.88 and a mean age of 55.5 ± 18.2 years. Indication for catheter placement was chronic renal insufficiency and loss of central venous access through traditional routes in all cases. Median functional catheter durations were 28 days (1–382) and 55.5 days (1–780) for right-sided and left-sided access, respectively. Complication rates were similar for both sides. There was no difference between primary and revision procedures in terms of safety and efficacy outcomes. In univariate Cox regression analysis, gender was the only variable which was found to be statistically significant (HR = 2.014 (1.004–4.038)) for functional catheter days. In multivariate Cox regression model, gender and access side were included which failed to reach statistical significance. Conclusions In our study, both right- and left-sided approaches provided similar safety and efficacy outcomes, suggesting that both techniques can be employed based on physician’s preference.