Use of Permanent Peritoneal Catheters and Peritoneal Ports for the Treatment of Non-Malignant and Malignant Refractory Ascites: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Sebastian Sanchez-Lopez; Huber Said Padilla-Zambrano; Maria Susana Cerino-Penaloza; Michel Juarez; Julie Sang; Nathalia Arenas-Munoz; Vanessa Seijas

doi:10.1007/s11901-026-00730-0

$Use of Permanent Peritoneal Catheters and Peritoneal Ports for the Treatment of Non-Malignant and Malignant Refractory Ascites: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis$

Journal article

Open access

Peer reviewed

Use of Permanent Peritoneal Catheters and Peritoneal Ports for the Treatment of Non-Malignant and Malignant Refractory Ascites: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Sebastian Sanchez-Lopez, Huber Said Padilla-Zambrano, Maria Susana Cerino-Penaloza, Michel Juarez, Julie Sang, Nathalia Arenas-Munoz and Vanessa Seijas

Current hepatology reports, Vol.25(1), 13

04/13/2026

DOI: 10.1007/s11901-026-00730-0

Appears in UI Libraries Support Open Access

Files and links (1)

url

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11901-026-00730-0View

Published (Version of record) Open Access

Abstract

Purpose of review This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of permanent peritoneal catheters (PPC) and peritoneal ports (PP) in patients with refractory ascites of malignant and non-malignant etiology, irrespective of etiology, and to compare these devices to large-volume paracentesis (LVP). Recent findings Twenty-nine studies were included, with the majority being case series. Meta-analysis found no significant difference in peritonitis risk between PPC/PP and LVP. Cellulitis, occlusion, and ascites leakage were variably reported across studies. Average catheter patency was approximately 72 days. Quality of life improvements were reported in only a subset of studies, with considerable heterogeneity in assessment tools and limited standardization of definitions and prophylaxis protocols. Summary Despite substantial heterogeneity and risk of bias across included studies, no significant differences in safety were observed between PPC/PP and LVP. Available evidence suggests these devices may offer practical advantages in symptom control and could reduce the need for repeated paracentesis in selected patients. However, further randomized studies are needed to standardize protocols and better guide clinical implementation.

Gastroenterology & Hepatology

Life Sciences & Biomedicine

Science & Technology

UIOWA OA Agreement

Details

Title: Subtitle: Use of Permanent Peritoneal Catheters and Peritoneal Ports for the Treatment of Non-Malignant and Malignant Refractory Ascites: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Creators: Sebastian Sanchez-Lopez - Univ Iowa Hosp & Clin, Dept Infect Dis, Iowa City, IA 52242 USA
Huber Said Padilla-Zambrano - Icahn Sch Med Mt Sinai, Dept Emergency Med, New York, NY USA
Maria Susana Cerino-Penaloza - Universidad Autónoma de Nuevo León
Michel Juarez - Texas Tech University
Julie Sang - Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center
Nathalia Arenas-Munoz - Universidad Santiago de Cali
Vanessa Seijas - Universidad de Antioquia
Resource Type: Journal article
Publication Details: Current hepatology reports, Vol.25(1), 13
DOI: 10.1007/s11901-026-00730-0
ISSN: 2195-9595
eISSN: 2195-9595
Publisher: Springer Nature
Number of pages: 12
Language: English
Date published: 04/13/2026
Academic Unit: Infectious Diseases
Record Identifier: 9985160639602771

Metrics

1 Record Views