Literature DB >> 18787353

Port catheter insufficiency: incidence and clinical-radiological correlations.

Alexey Surov1, Karin Jordan, Michael Buerke, Dirk Arnold, Endris John, Rolf-Peter Spielmann, Curd Behrmann.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to analyse the radiological findings and corresponding clinical signs in patients with port catheter insufficiency. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this single-centre retrospective study, 1,185 totally implantable port devices were implanted from January 1997 to December 2005. Patients with suspected port insufficiency receiving a port angiography were evaluated, and patient files were analysed for the accompanying clinical signs of the port malfunction.
RESULTS: In this period, 186 port angiographies were obtained. In all, 223 radiological findings were identified, which translates into a complication rate of 18.9% in regard to all im-planted ports (aip). The complications were as follows: port catheter thrombosis (53.4%, 10% aip), pinch off syndrome (24.2%, 4.6% aip), catheter migration (7.2%, 1.4% aip), catheter retraction (6.3%, 1.2% aip), catheter rupture (4.0%, 0.8% aip), catheter disconnection (3.1%, 0.6% aip), and port chamber defect (1.8%, 0.3% aip). The main clinical symptoms included blood aspiration impossibility, resistance to injection of fluids, chest wall swelling, and pain during injection.
CONCLUSIONS: The knowledge of the different types of port catheter insufficiencies in correspondence with the possible associated clinical signs plays a key role in the recognition and prevention of further port-associated complications such as paravasation. Copyright 2008 S. Karger AG, Basel.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18787353     DOI: 10.1159/000140454

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Onkologie        ISSN: 0378-584X


  9 in total

Review 1.  [Antineoplastic drug-induced extravasation].

Authors:  Maike de Wit
Journal:  Med Klin (Munich)       Date:  2010-11

2.  Ports made from synthetic materials are poorly visible on x-ray films.

Authors:  Carsten Rusner; Alexey Surov
Journal:  Dtsch Arztebl Int       Date:  2011-07-29       Impact factor: 5.594

Review 3.  [Nonthrombotic pulmonary embolisms].

Authors:  A G Bach; D Schramm; A Surov
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  2017-03       Impact factor: 0.635

4.  [Indications, technique and complications of port implantation].

Authors:  L Haeder; J Jähne
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  2013-07       Impact factor: 0.955

5.  A comparison of outcomes and complications of totally implantable access port through the internal jugular vein versus the subclavian vein.

Authors:  Yoshinobu Nagasawa; Tomoharu Shimizu; Hiromichi Sonoda; Eiji Mekata; Masato Wakabayashi; Hiroyuki Ohta; Satoshi Murata; Tsuyoshi Mori; Shigeyuki Naka; Tohru Tani
Journal:  Int Surg       Date:  2014 Mar-Apr

Review 6.  Systematic review: malfunction of totally implantable venous access devices in cancer patients.

Authors:  Godelieve Alice Goossens; Marguerite Stas; Martine Jérôme; Philip Moons
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2011-05-10       Impact factor: 3.603

7.  Performance of venous port catheter insertion by a general surgeon: a prospective study.

Authors:  Mehmet Aziret; Oktay İrkörücü; Cihan Gökler; Enver Reyhan; Süleyman Çetinkünar; Timuçin Çil; Edip Akpınar; Hasan Erdem; Kamuran Cumhur Değer
Journal:  Int Surg       Date:  2015-05

8.  Implantable port thrombosis in cancer patients: a monocentric experience.

Authors:  Manel Dridi; Nesrine Mejri; Soumaya Labidi; Mehdi Afrit; Houda El Benna; Khaoula Ben Miled; Hamouda Boussen
Journal:  Cancer Biol Med       Date:  2016-09       Impact factor: 4.248

9.  Epidemiology and natural history of central venous access device use and infusion pump function in the NO16966 trial.

Authors:  E Chu; D Haller; T Cartwright; C Twelves; J Cassidy; W Sun; M W Saif; E McKenna; S Lee; H-J Schmoll
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2014-02-18       Impact factor: 7.640

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.