Background/Objectives: The success of peritoneal dialysis is highly dependent on the integrity of the abdominal wall. Therefore, routine examination and treatment of abdominal hernias can prevent peritoneal dialysis (PD) failure, discontinuation, and conversion to hemodialysis. In this present study, we present our examination protocol for patients proposed for PD and our attitude in treating parietal defects in patients on peritoneal dialysis. Objectives: highlight whether PD is a risk factor for the occurrence of ventral hernias, the relationship between associated pathologies and the occurrence of hernias and the need for an HD switch in the postoperative period. Methods: Between January 2016 and December 2022, a group of 133 patients proposed for insertion of a PD catheter were evaluated according to the protocol established by our hospital. Routine examination for the diagnosis of abdominal hernias and repair before starting the DP is part of the procedure. We included patients with a 3 year minimum follow-up after insertion and evaluated the incidence of parietal defects that appeared during PD treatment. Results: Nine patients were diagnosed and operated on for abdominal hernia before starting peritoneal dialysis and none of them had a recurrence of hernia during PD. Twelve patients were diagnosed with abdominal hernias during dialysis treatment (9% incidence) and the median length of time at which parietal defects occur during PD is 12.5 months [range 2–48]. Median BMI is 27.12 [range 22.3–31.24], with a female–male ratio of 2:1 Five patients were transferred to HD, three permanently and two patients temporarily. No patient abandoned PD treatment due to the presence of an abdominal parietal defect. Conclusions: Diagnosis of ventral hernias prior to the time of catheterization for PD leads to a decrease in the incidence of parietal defects during PD and is mandatory in patients who are candidates for PD. Open alloplastic surgical procedures are safe procedures with a low recurrence rate in PD patients. The postoperative continuation of PD is feasible but the decision is to be made by the multidisciplinary team and individualized for each patient.

The incidence of breast and colorectal cancers is well established in studies, but the synchronous occurrence of the two types of tumors is a rarity. In general, they are discovered during screening investigations following the diagnosis of an initial tumor. Objective: Our aim is to describe the main diagnostic and therapeutic challenges for synchronous breast and colorectal tumors. Materials and methods: We performed a systematic review of the literature for cases or case series, using established keywords (synchronous breast and colon tumor and synonyms) for the period of 1970–2023. Five reviewers independently screened the literature, extracted data, and assessed the quality of the included studies. The results were processed according to the PRISMA 2020 guidelines. Results: A total of 15 cases were included in the study, including 2 males (age 50 and 57) and 13 females (median age 60, with range from 40 to 79). In a vast majority of the cases, the diagnosis of synchronous tumor was prompted by the first tumor’s workup. The first diagnosed tumor was colorectal in nine cases and a breast tumor in six cases. The most common histopathological type of breast tumor was invasive ductal carcinoma, and the colon tumors were exclusively adenocarcinomas. All cases had a surgical indication for both breast and colorectal tumor, except one case, in which the breast tumor had multiple metastasis. In four cases, the surgery was performed concomitantly (colectomy and mastectomy). In three cases, surgery was initially carried out for the breast tumor, followed by colon surgery. Oncological treatment was indicated depending on the tumor stage. Conclusions: For the treatment of synchronous tumors, the Tumor Board (T.B) decision is mandatory and must be personalized for each patient. Developing new methods of treatment and investigation may play an important role in the future for understanding synchronous tumor development, incidence, and outcome.

The COVID-19 pandemic struck unexpectedly; emergency services and chronic care institutions, including dialysis centers, were overloaded. A significant problem was the care of COVID-positive patients alongside the care of chronically dialyzed patients who presented emergencies. In our hospital, which became a COVID support center for dialysis patients with severe forms of the disease, we had to care for PD patients with dialysis-related emergencies. We present two cases of patients managed on an outpatient basis or 1-day hospitalization who were treated successfully without compromising the quality of the care provided. We used remote monitoring, worked in a multidisciplinary team, and shortened the duration of the patients’ hospitalization (and implicitly the risk of contact). In pandemic conditions, the advantage of PD was the possibility of patient isolation; in the first 6 months of the pandemic, we recorded no deaths in this category of patients. In hemodialysis patients, infection and mortality rates were high. Although we expected an increase in the number of peritoneal dialysis patients in the post-pandemic period, this did not happen. We continue to plead for the popularization of the PD method among patients and doctors, which has proven advantages in pandemic conditions.

The COVID-19 pandemic struck unexpectedly, emergency services and chronic care institutions, including dialysis centers, were overloaded. An important problem was the care of positive COVID patients, but also the care of chronically dialyzed patients who presented emergencies. In our Hospital, which has become a COVID support for dialysis patients with severe forms of the disease, we had to care for PD patients with dialysis-related emergencies. We presented 2 cases of patients managed on an outpatient basis or 1 day hospitalization, treated successfully and without compromising the quality of the care provided. We used remote monitoring, we worked in a multidiscipli-nary team, we shortened the hospitalization of patients (and implicitly the risk of contact). In pandemic conditions, the advantage of PD was represented by the possibility of patient isolation, so that in the first 6 months of the pandemic, we recorded no deaths in this category of patients. In case of hemodialysis patients, in-fection and mortality rates were high. Although we expected an increase in the number of peritoneal dialysis patients in the post-pandemic period, this did not happen. We continue to plead for the popularization of the PD method among patients and doctors, which has proven its advantages under the conditions of the pandemic.

Background/Objectives: Peritoneal dialysis as a form of renal function sub-stitution is not as widespread as hemodialysis. However, it has recognized advantages such as preservation of the residual renal func-tion, no need for vascular access , can be performed at home, but requires a proper in-sertion of a peritoneal dialysis (PD) catheter and maintaining its patency. Methods: We presented a 10-year retrospective study on a group of 133 patients hos-pitalized for peritoneal dialysis catheter insertion/replacement. We routinely implant the catheter laparoscopically, but there were cases in which the insertion was performed open route. We analyzed the patient group by age and gender criteria, number of complications and time when they appeared, duration of surgical intervention and the surgical technique used (126 were performed laparoscopically and 7 were inserted via open route). The open technique was performed mainly in patients with contraindications of general anesthesia. Results: We encountered a number of 23 complications in 18 patients, in only 1 case the patient was switched to permanent hemodialysis (at his own wish). We highlighted in the study the indisputable advantages of laparoscopy, supported by the results obtained: correct placement of the catheter, the possibility of adhesiolysis, preservation of the peritoneal surface through minor op-erative trauma, low number of complications(bleeding, migration, hernia 0,8%, leakage 4%, lower than those found in the literature). Even if infection was the most frequent complication (peritonitis 35%, catheter exit site infection 30.4%), only 1 case appered in the pretraining period. All complications were managed by medical treatment or by temporary cessation of peritoneal lavage, except of two cases that required reimplantation of the catheter. Conclusions: Laparoscopic catheter insertion for PD is a safe method, with reduced post-procedural complications, thus ensuring a long duration of the functionality of the catheter.