Literature DB >> 1570619

Groshong versus Hickman catheters.

M D Pasquale1, J M Campbell, C M Magnant.   

Abstract

There has been an increasing need for safe and efficient means of establishing vascular access in the patient with cancer. Recently, the use of percutaneous cannulation of the central veins, using guidewires, venous dilators and tearaway introducer sheaths, has become a popular method of establishing such access. The greatest concerns with the use of such catheters include sepsis, thrombus formation within the vein and catheter malfunction. The current study compared the incidence of these complications with Groshong (Cath Tech CV catheters with Groshong valve) and Hickman (Bard Access Systems vascular access catheters) catheters. Although there was no significant difference in septic complications and thrombus formation between the two groups, there was a significant (p less than 0.05) difference in catheter malfunction. Patients with Hickman catheters experienced significantly less problems with one way intermittent and one way catheters than did patients with Groshong catheters. We conclude that, based on catheter function, the Hickman catheter appears to be a more favorable alternative when compared with the Groshong catheter in the patient with cancer.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1992        PMID: 1570619

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Surg Gynecol Obstet        ISSN: 0039-6087


  7 in total

1.  Retention of lepirudin at the tip of a silicone catheter: a better catheter flush solution?

Authors:  McDonald K Horne; Elizabeth Inkellis
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2004-02-13       Impact factor: 3.603

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.  The prognostic significance of the ball-valve effect in Groshong catheters.

Authors:  B Tolar; J R Gould
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  1996-01       Impact factor: 3.603

4.  A randomized trial of valved vs nonvalved implantable ports for vascular access.

Authors:  Jeffrey P Lamont; Todd M McCarty; Jeffrey S Stephens; Bruce A Smith; John Carlo; Sheryl Livingston; Joseph A Kuhn
Journal:  Proc (Bayl Univ Med Cent)       Date:  2003-10

Review 5.  Peripherally inserted central venous catheters are not superior to central venous catheters in the acute care of surgical patients on the ward.

Authors:  Simon Turcotte; Serge Dubé; Gilles Beauchamp
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 3.352

Review 6.  Administration of chemotherapeutic agents. Techniques and controversies.

Authors:  J H Raaf
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  1994-11       Impact factor: 3.603

7.  1000 Port-A-Cath ® placements by subclavian vein approach: single surgeon experience.

Authors:  S Mudan; A Giakoustidis; D Morrison; S Iosifidou; R Raobaikady; K Neofytou; J Stebbing
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2015-02       Impact factor: 3.352

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.