scholarly journals Pneumothorax and Subclavian Vein Thrombosis in Patients With Venous Access Device Implantation

2017 ◽  
Vol 102 (7-8) ◽  
pp. 382-386
Author(s):  
Valentina Bestetti ◽  
Roman Zeller ◽  
Anna S. Wenning ◽  
Kim T. Mouton ◽  
Wolfgang G. Mouton
Keyword(s):  
Subclavian Vein ◽  
Venous Access ◽  
Secondary Outcome ◽  
Chest Drain ◽  
Complication Rates ◽  
Access Device ◽  
Vein Thrombosis ◽  
Subclavian Vein Thrombosis ◽  
Venous Access Device ◽  
Length Of Hospitalization

The primary aim is to assess the length of hospitalization due to iatrogenic pneumothorax as a main complication of totally implantable venous access device (TIVAD) implantation. Secondary aim is to analyze the thrombogenic effects of different catheter diameters on the subclavian vein. Pneumothorax is a rare and may be underestimated, underdocumented, but serious complication in TIVAD of implantation using the subclavian vein puncture method. A total of 1155 consecutive patients with TIVAD implantation were assessed retrospectively over a 14-year time period. As primary outcome the length of hospitalization due to iatrogenic pneumothorax and as secondary outcome subclavian vein thrombosis (SVT) in relation to different TIVAD catheter sizes were analyzed. Pneumothoraces occurred 6 times (0.52%) and only when the subclavian vein was punctured. The median hospitalization for these patients was 8 days (5 of the 6 patients needed a chest drain). No pneumothoraces occurred when a peripheral vein was used for access (980 patients). SVTs were detected in 13 patients (1.1%) without any correlation to the diameter of the catheter. There was no significant correlation detected between the different tumor types and the complication rates. Iatrogenic pneumothorax may lead to hospitalization of 1 week or more. The costs then increase with additional chests x-rays, chest drain insertions, and hospitalization days. When making the choice for surgical venous cutdown or subclavian vein puncture to implant TIVAD, the consequences of iatrogenic pneumothorax should be considered as pneumothorax is a rare but serious complication of TIVAD implantation inherent to subclavian vein puncture.

Risk factors determining central venous access device-associated deep vein thrombosis resolution in children: a retrospective study

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Miguel García-Boyano ◽  
José Manuel Caballero-Caballero ◽  
Marta García Fernández de Villalta ◽  
Mar Gutiérrez Alvariño ◽  
María Jesús Blanco Bañares ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Deep Vein Thrombosis ◽  
Central Venous Access ◽  
Venous Access ◽  
Central Venous ◽  
Central Venous Access Device ◽  
Access Device ◽  
Vein Thrombosis ◽  
Venous Access Device ◽  
Deep Vein

scholarly journals Preliminary experience on subcutaneous venous access device (chemoport) in a teaching hospital in Kathmandu

2016 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 50-54
Author(s):  
Robin Joshi
Keyword(s):  
Venous Access ◽  
Late Complications ◽  
Urinary Bladder Carcinoma ◽  
Complication Rates ◽  
Major Life ◽  
Access Device ◽  
Medical College ◽  
Peripheral Venous Access ◽  
Ultrasound Guided Puncture ◽  
Venous Access Device

Background: Modern subcutaneous venous access device or chemo port nowadays is a vital device used in case of chronic diseases. It is now an established device for administration of medication and blood withdrawal without difficulty and negating repeated skin punctures for those patients who need repeated and long term intravenous medication. But, these devices are not without complications.Objective: To assess preliminary technical success and complication rates of the ultrasound and fluoroscopy guided placement of subcutaneous venous access device.Methods: Between November 2012 to May 2015, 10 port catheter components were implanted. All components were inserted under image guidance. Ultrasound guided puncture of right internal jugular vein was preferred and position of tip of catheter was confirmed by fluoroscopy. Early and late complications were evaluated. The overall cost of the chemo port was also taken into consideration.Results: The implantation was inserted in ten cases. Four patients had ovarian carcinoma, three patients metastatic colonic carcinoma, one had testicular cancer with meditational mass, one patient had metastatic invasive urinary bladder carcinoma and another one had porphyries whose peripheral venous access were all thromboses due to repeated puncture. Peri-procedural early complications like blockage, thrombosis, leak were not observed, however one patient had catheter related fever. Late complications like blockage, port, fractures, dislodgement, venous thrombosis were also not found but One patient had port pocket infection. The cost of the port device in all cases was about 50,000 Nepalese rupees.Conclusion: Larger number of case is required for better statistical evaluation. The main reason for the refusal of subcutaneous venous access device insertion by the patients was the high cost of the device. Cather-related morbidity was in acceptable range so chemo port insertion is feasible in Nepal. Major life threatening complication was not observed.Journal of Kathmandu Medical College, Vol. 4, No. 2, Issue 12, Apr.-Jun., 2015

scholarly journals Platelet-Rich Plasma in the Treatment of Subcutaneous Venous Access Device Scars: A Head-to-Head Patient Survey

2015 ◽  
Vol 2015 ◽  
pp. 1-5 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. Eichler ◽  
M. Najafpour ◽  
A. Sauerwald ◽  
J. Puppe ◽  
M. Warm
Keyword(s):  
Surgical Outcome ◽  
Platelet Rich Plasma ◽  
Venous Access ◽  
Outcome Evaluation ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Complication Rates ◽  
Access Device ◽  
Port Area ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Venous Access Device

Introduction. Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) is a product widely used in sports medicine, tissue repair, and general surgery. A recent meta-analysis showed this product to be beneficial when introduced into a wound area, be it intra-articular (i.e., joint-injections) or direct introduction onto the wound surface.Methods. Between the years of 2012 and 2014 a questionnaire evaluating surgical outcome after port (venous access device) removal was answered by 100 patients in the control group and 20 patients in a PRP group, leading to a total of 120 patients in this single center, retrospective, subjective outcome evaluation.Results. No statistical difference was shown in postsurgical complication rates, postsurgical pain, decreased mobility, and overall quality of life. A significant difference was shown in overall patient satisfaction and the desire to further improve port area scarring. Results differed significantly in favor of the PRP group. Interestingly, approximately 40.2% of patients are dissatisfied with the surgical outcome after port removal in the control group. This result, though surprising, may be improved to 10% dissatisfaction when a PRP product is used.Conclusion. PRP products such as Arthrex ACP are safe to use and present an additional option in improving surgical outcome.

scholarly journals Totally Implantable Venous Access Device (Chemoport) in Oncology: Study of 168 Polyurethane Chemoport Catheter System

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (04) ◽  
pp. 261-264
Author(s):  
Gyanendra Swaroop Mittal ◽  
Deepak Sundriyal ◽  
Niranjan B. Naik ◽  
Amit Sehrawat
Keyword(s):  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Venous Access ◽  
Access Device ◽  
Vein Thrombosis ◽  
Catheter System ◽  
Catheter Tip ◽  
Polyurethane Catheters ◽  
Venous Access Device ◽  
Deep Vein

Abstract Background Chemoport (totally implantable venous access device) and its catheter system are used to administer long-term chemotherapy in cancer patients. The objective of this study was to analyze the complications associated with chemoport insertion in various cancer patients. Material and Methods A total number of 168 chemoports along with polyurethane catheters were inserted in various cancer patients over a period of 3 years. 9.6 F polyurethane catheters were put by a team of surgical oncologists in operation theater under general or local anesthesia. Analysis of the complications was done until the chemoport was removed due to any reason. Results Out of 168 patients, 30 (17.85%) developed complications. Complications included arterial puncture, malposition of the catheter tip, pneumothorax, hematoma, seroma, deep vein thrombosis, fracture of the catheter, a reversal of port, infections, and thrombosis of the catheter. Only a few required premature port and catheter removal. Conclusion There was a low rate of complications associated with chemoport using a polyurethane type of catheter system. However, infection-related complications were comparatively more common in our series. Chemoport requires expert handling, patient education, strict follow-up, and dedicated teamwork to minimize complications.

scholarly journals Comparison of the Quality of Life of Patients with Breast or Colon Cancer with an Arm Vein Port (TIVAD) Versus a Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter (PICC)

2021 ◽  
Vol 28 (2) ◽  
pp. 1495-1506
Author(s):  
Brent Burbridge ◽  
Hyun Lim ◽  
Lynn Dwernychuk ◽  
Ha Le ◽  
Tehmina Asif ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Venous Access ◽  
Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter ◽  
Central Catheter ◽  
Access Device ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Venous Access Device

Introduction: Venous access is a crucial element in chemotherapy delivery. It remains unclear whether cancer patients prefer a port to a peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC). Our study aimed to assess cancer patients’ satisfaction with their venous access device and to compare the quality of life (QoL) of subjects with a PICC to those with a port. Methods: In this prospective cohort study, EORTC QLQ-C30, and a locally developed quality of life survey (QLAVD), designed to assess satisfaction with venous access devices, were administered to breast or colorectal cancer patients over a one-year period following the device insertion. Mixed effects models were used to assess changes on mean scores at different time points. Results: A total of 101 patients were recruited over a three-year period, (PICC group, n = 50; port group, n = 51). Survey response rates for months one and three were 72% and 48%, respectively. Overall, no significant differences were noted between the two groups in relation to EORTC QOL. At three months, the mean pain scores were 3.5 ± 2.3 for the port and 1.3 ± 0.75 for PICC (<0.001). The mean score for a negative effect of the venous access device on psychosocial well-being was 6.0 ± 4.1 for PICC and 3.0 ± 2.7 for the port (p = 0.005). Complications related to PICCs occurred in 38% patients versus 41% with a port (p > 0.24). Conclusions: Although subjects with a port experienced more pain during the device insertion or access for chemotherapy, it had a smaller negative impact on psychosocial scores than the PICC. No significant differences in complications rates were observed between the two devices.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document