GOAL OF WORK: Totally implantable venous access ports are widely accepted in cancer patient treatment, but withdrawal occlusion (WO) can hamper the use of the device. A newly designed Vortex VX port, with a tangential outlet, should allow better clearance of the chamber, thereby reducing occlusion of the device. The present study compared the Vortex port to the classically shaped Celsite port with regards to functional complications. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two hundred cancer patients were included in a prospective, randomised controlled trial and randomly assigned to the implantation of a Vortex or a Celsite port. Insertion details such as used vein, catheter tip position and infusion or aspiration abilities were recorded. Data were collected concerning ease of access, and functional evaluation was performed each time the port was accessed, regarding the ability to infuse fluids with a syringe and to withdraw blood by measuring the filling time of a Vacutainer blood tube. MAIN RESULTS:Ninety-nine patients received a Celsite port, and 101 had a Vortex port. Demographic variables and insertion details were comparable in both groups. All functional complications, including WO, total occlusion, sluggish inflow and sluggish withdrawal, were higher in the Celsite group (16.12%) than in the Vortex group (11.36%). This difference was not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: This study revealed that functional problems occurred less frequently in Vortex compared to Celsite ports. Differences were small and not significant, which indicates that functional problems may be related to other factors.
RCT Entities:
GOAL OF WORK: Totally implantable venous access ports are widely accepted in cancerpatient treatment, but withdrawal occlusion (WO) can hamper the use of the device. A newly designed Vortex VX port, with a tangential outlet, should allow better clearance of the chamber, thereby reducing occlusion of the device. The present study compared the Vortex port to the classically shaped Celsite port with regards to functional complications. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two hundred cancerpatients were included in a prospective, randomised controlled trial and randomly assigned to the implantation of a Vortex or a Celsite port. Insertion details such as used vein, catheter tip position and infusion or aspiration abilities were recorded. Data were collected concerning ease of access, and functional evaluation was performed each time the port was accessed, regarding the ability to infuse fluids with a syringe and to withdraw blood by measuring the filling time of a Vacutainer blood tube. MAIN RESULTS: Ninety-nine patients received a Celsite port, and 101 had a Vortex port. Demographic variables and insertion details were comparable in both groups. All functional complications, including WO, total occlusion, sluggish inflow and sluggish withdrawal, were higher in the Celsite group (16.12%) than in the Vortex group (11.36%). This difference was not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: This study revealed that functional problems occurred less frequently in Vortex compared to Celsite ports. Differences were small and not significant, which indicates that functional problems may be related to other factors.
Authors: Charles P Semba; Steven R Deitcher; Xin Li; Laura Resnansky; Tri Tu; Edward R McCluskey Journal: J Vasc Interv Radiol Date: 2002-12 Impact factor: 3.464
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
Authors: Jo Caers; Christel Fontaine; Vincent Vinh-Hung; Johan De Mey; Gerrit Ponnet; Chris Oost; Jan Lamote; Jacques De Greve; Benjamin Van Camp; Patrick Lacor Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2004-11-05 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Petr Svoboda; R Philip Barton; Olga L Barbarash; Alexey A Butylin; Brian R Jacobs; Jan Lata; William D Haire; Michael R Jaff; Carolyn M Firszt; Tamyra L Mouginis; Debra M Schuerr; Gregory A Schulz; Lewis B Schwartz; Mohamed A El-Shahawy Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2004-10 Impact factor: 7.598