Literature DB >> 11830624

Risk of deep venous thrombosis associated with chest versus arm central venous subcutaneous port catheters: a 5-year single-institution retrospective study.

Philip Kuriakose1, Gerardo Colon-Otero, Ricardo Paz-Fumagalli.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To determine the risk of deep venous thrombosis (DVT) in patients undergoing placement of central (chest) versus peripheral (arm) ports.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between January 1996 and December 2000, a total of 440 implantable chest or arm ports were placed in 422 patients. Data pertaining to the first port placed for each patient was analyzed. Ports were placed for chemotherapy (n = 415) or blood transfusion (n = 7). Subset analysis was performed, taking into consideration whether patients received prophylactic or therapeutic doses of warfarin sodium (Coumadin), to determine if there was any difference in the incidence of DVT between patients undergoing some form of anticoagulation versus those undergoing none. The medical records of these patients were reviewed to determine outcome with reference to development of DVT.
RESULTS: In 273 chest ports placed, there were 13 (4.8%) instances of DVT; in 149 peripheral ports, there were 17 (11.4%). Censoring data on patients receiving some form of anticoagulation, the respective incidences were eight of 245 (3.3%) and 14 of 129 (10.9%). With use of Kaplan-Meier analysis and log-rank tests to examine comparisons of interest, the probability of thrombosis occurring over a period of 180 days was higher with peripheral ports irrespective of Coumadin use (P =.007 for all patients considered, P =.002 when analyzed only for those not receiving Coumadin). The difference in incidence of thrombosis for all ports between patients receiving Coumadin versus those not receiving Coumadin was not significant.
CONCLUSIONS: Compared to chest ports, peripheral ports are associated with a significantly higher incidence of DVT.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2002        PMID: 11830624     DOI: 10.1016/s1051-0443(07)61936-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Vasc Interv Radiol        ISSN: 1051-0443            Impact factor:   3.464


  21 in total

1.  Totally implantable venous power ports of the forearm and the chest: initial clinical experience with port devices approved for high-pressure injections.

Authors:  J P Goltz; C Noack; B Petritsch; J Kirchner; D Hahn; R Kickuth
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2012-06-06       Impact factor: 3.039

2.  Disconnection of chamber and catheter as a complication of central venous catheter type port-a-cath.

Authors:  S Kostic; V Kovcin; M Granić; D Jevdic; N Stanisavljevic
Journal:  Med Oncol       Date:  2010-07-07       Impact factor: 3.064

Review 3.  Risk-assessment algorithm and recommendations for venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in medical patients.

Authors:  Ana T Rocha; Edison F Paiva; Arnaldo Lichtenstein; Rodolfo Milani; Cyrillo Filho Cavalheiro; Francisco H Maffei
Journal:  Vasc Health Risk Manag       Date:  2007

4.  Femoral placement of totally implantable venous power ports as an alternative implantation site for patients with central vein occlusions.

Authors:  Jan P Goltz; Hendrik Janssen; Bernhard Petritsch; Ralph Kickuth
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2013-09-24       Impact factor: 3.603

5.  Arm port implantation in cancer patients.

Authors:  Pierre-Yves Marcy; Andrea Figl; Nicolas Amoretti; Antoine Ianessi
Journal:  Int J Clin Oncol       Date:  2010-03-02       Impact factor: 3.402

6.  Percutaneous image-guided implantation of totally implantable venous access ports in the forearm or the chest? A patients' point of view.

Authors:  Jan Peter Goltz; Bernhard Petritsch; Johannes Kirchner; Dietbert Hahn; Ralph Kickuth
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2012-07-25       Impact factor: 3.603

7.  Choosing the appropriate side for subcutaneous port catheter placement in patients with mastectomy: ipsilateral or contralateral?

Authors:  Omer Fatih Nas; Kadir Hacikurt; Ahmet Kaya; Nurullah Dogan; Bekir Sanal; Guven Ozkaya; Halit Ziya Dundar; Cuneyt Erdogan
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2017-02-17       Impact factor: 3.469

8.  Should not we be using aspirin in patients with a ventriculoatrial shunt? Borrowing a leaf from other specialities: a case for surrogate evidence.

Authors:  Suhas Udayakumaran; Shine Kumar
Journal:  Childs Nerv Syst       Date:  2020-10-08       Impact factor: 1.475

9.  Short-term and long-term outcome of radiological-guided insertion of central venous access port devices implanted at the forearm: a retrospective monocenter analysis in 1704 patients.

Authors:  Moritz Wildgruber; Sebastian Borgmeyer; Bernhard Haller; Heike Jansen; Jochen Gaa; Marion Kiechle; Reinhard Meier; Johannes Ettl; Hermann Berger
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2014-09-20       Impact factor: 5.315

10.  Long-term outcomes of peripheral arm ports implanted in patients with colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Junichiro Kawamura; Satoshi Nagayama; Akinari Nomura; Atsushi Itami; Hiroshi Okabe; Seiji Sato; Go Watanabe; Yoshiharu Sakai
Journal:  Int J Clin Oncol       Date:  2008-08-15       Impact factor: 3.402

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.