Literature DB >> 1453208

A prospective randomized trial comparing the infectious and noninfectious complications of an externalized catheter versus a subcutaneously implanted device in cancer patients.

B U Mueller1, J Skelton, D P Callender, D Marshall, J Gress, D Longo, J Norton, M Rubin, D Venzon, P A Pizzo.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To compare the frequency of infectious episodes or other problems occurring with an externalized catheter (Hickman) versus a subcutaneously implanted device (Port-a-Cath, Pharmacia, Piscataway, NJ) in cancer patients, we performed a prospective, randomized study in 100 cancer patients (age range, 5 to 74 years). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients who were chemotherapy candidates and required an indwelling catheter were monitored prospectively and evaluated during the 180 days after the insertion of the catheter and again at time of study closure. The frequency of catheter use, reason for access, and any problems that might have been related to catheter use were noted. All data were collected prospectively and included the patient's age, sex, underlying malignancy, temperature, and leukocyte and absolute granulocyte counts at the time of catheter insertion and when complications occurred. The time to and reason for removal of the catheter, as well as any intercurrent infectious or mechanical problems, were also determined.
RESULTS: Most of the infections that occurred were caused by gram-positive organisms, especially staphylococci or streptococci. A total of 22 complications (11 in each group) resulted in removal of the central line. Only one infection in the Hickman catheter group and four in the Port-a-Cath group led to removal of the central line. All other infectious episodes were successfully treated without removal of the catheters. The mean device life was 230 days for the Hickman catheter and 318 days for the Port-a-Cath (not significant).
CONCLUSION: There were no differences between the two study groups regarding incidence of documented infections or mechanical or thrombotic complications.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1992        PMID: 1453208     DOI: 10.1200/JCO.1992.10.12.1943

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Oncol        ISSN: 0732-183X            Impact factor:   44.544


  25 in total

1.  Outcome analysis in 3,160 implantations of radiologically guided placements of totally implantable central venous port systems.

Authors:  Ulf K M Teichgräber; Stephan Kausche; Sebastian N Nagel; Bernhard Gebauer
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2011-01-05       Impact factor: 5.315

2.  Long-term, tunneled, noncuffed central venous catheter in cancer patients (Vygon): safety, efficacy, and complications.

Authors:  Giovanna Masci; Massimo Magagnoli; Vittorio Pedicini; Dario Poretti; Luca Castagna; Carlo Carnaghi; Emanuela Morenghi; Antonietta Del Vecchio; Rita Finotto; Giorgio Brambilla; Armando Santoro
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2006-04-19       Impact factor: 3.603

3.  Central venous catheter use in UKCCSG oncology centres. United Kingdom Children's Cancer Study Group and the Paediatric Oncology Nursing Forum.

Authors:  D A Tweddle; K P Windebank; A M Barrett; D C Leese; R Gowing
Journal:  Arch Dis Child       Date:  1997-07       Impact factor: 3.791

4.  Vancomycin and ceftazidime bioactivities persist for at least 2 weeks in the lumen in ports: simplifying treatment of port-associated bloodstream infections by using the antibiotic lock technique.

Authors:  Y Haimi-Cohen; N Husain; J Meenan; G Karayalcin; M Lehrer; L G Rubin
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2001-05       Impact factor: 5.191

5.  Venographic surveillance of tunneled venous access devices in adult oncology patients.

Authors:  M K Horne; D J May; H R Alexander; E P Steinhaus; E D Whitman; R C Chang; J L Doppman
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  1995-03       Impact factor: 5.344

Review 6.  Common emergencies in cancer medicine: infectious and treatment-related syndromes, Part I.

Authors:  C R Thomas; L V Wood; J G Douglas; K J Stelzer; W Koh; R Panicker
Journal:  J Natl Med Assoc       Date:  1994-10       Impact factor: 1.798

Review 7.  Prophylaxis of catheter-related venous thrombosis in cancer patients.

Authors:  Meinolf Karthaus
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2008-02-15       Impact factor: 3.603

8.  Implantable venous port-related infections in cancer patients.

Authors:  Wen-Tsung Huang; Tsai-Yun Chen; Wu-Chou Su; Chia-Jui Yen; Chao-Jung Tsao
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2004-01-16       Impact factor: 3.603

Review 9.  Long-term outcome of radiological-guided insertion of implanted central venous access port devices (CVAPD) for the delivery of chemotherapy in cancer patients: institutional experience and review of the literature.

Authors:  J Vardy; K Engelhardt; K Cox; J Jacquet; A McDade; M Boyer; P Beale; M Stockler; R Loneragan; B Dennien; R Waugh; S J Clarke
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2004-09-13       Impact factor: 7.640

10.  Capecitabine in combination with irinotecan (XELIRI), administered as a 2-weekly schedule, as first-line chemotherapy for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: a phase II study of the Spanish GOTI group.

Authors:  P Garcia-Alfonso; A Muñoz-Martin; M Mendez-Ureña; R Quiben-Pereira; E Gonzalez-Flores; G Perez-Manga
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2009-09-08       Impact factor: 7.640

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.