Literature DB >> 19492197

Randomised comparison of complications from three different permanent central venous access systems.

Riccardo E Vandoni1, Adriano Guerra, Piero Sanna, Marcel Bogen, Franco Cavalli, Philippe Gertsch.   

Abstract

PRINCIPLES: We present a prospective randomised trial comparing complications from three different permanent central venous access systems (PCVAS).
METHODS: The PCVAS trial groups were I, polyurethane ChemoSite (AutoSuture); II, polyurethane Port-a-Cath (Pharmacia-Upjohn); and III, silicone Port-a-Cath. The PCVAS were inserted under local anaesthesia by direct puncture of the subclavian vein, using the Seldinger technique. Every complication and ist evolution was recorded and analysed. The follow-up period was closed five years after the last PCVAS was implanted, and interrupted when for any reason the device was removed.
RESULTS: Over a period of 45 months, we included 228 patients (96 men, 132 women, average age 58 yr). Patients were followed from six days to 103 mo (median 14.7 mo). We observed 10 pneumothorax (4.3%), seven of them requiring drainage. Out of 10 infected ports (4.3%), eight were removed. We observed 46 complications (20.1%) related to the device (rupture, displacement, disconnection, and occlusion of the catheter). Most of the thirteen ruptures (5.7%) occurred in the space between the clavicle and the first rib. Catheters of group I ruptured more often than those of groups II and III (p <0.05). Polyurethane catheters ruptured more often than silicone catheters (p <0.01).
CONCLUSION: The polyurethane catheters that ruptured more often had a larger diameter and a thicker wall than the other polyurethane catheters, and were probably subjected to greater shearing between the clavicle and the first rib. Silicone catheters, although thicker and of larger diameter than the two other catheters, seemed more resistant to shearing.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19492197     DOI: smw-12523

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Swiss Med Wkly        ISSN: 0036-7672            Impact factor:   2.193


  18 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.  Retrospective outcome analysis of rates and types of complications after 8654 minimally invasive radiological port implantations via the subclavian vein without ultrasound guidance.

Authors:  Karolin J Paprottka; Jana Voelklein; Tobias Waggershauser; Maximilian F Reiser; Philipp M Paprottka
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2019-06-07       Impact factor: 3.469

Review 3.  Totally implantable catheter migration and its percutaneous retrieval: case report and review of the literature.

Authors:  E Intagliata; F Basile; R Vecchio
Journal:  G Chir       Date:  2017 Sep-Oct

4.  Totally Implantable Central Venous Port Catheters: Radiation Exposure as a Function of Puncture Site and Operator Experience.

Authors:  Martin Jonczyk; Bernhard Gebauer; Roman Rotzinger; Dirk Schnapauff; Bernd Hamm; Federico Collettini
Journal:  In Vivo       Date:  2018 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 2.155

5.  Central venous port systems as an integral part of chemotherapy.

Authors:  Ulf K Teichgräber; Robert Pfitzmann; Herbert A F Hofmann
Journal:  Dtsch Arztebl Int       Date:  2011-03-04       Impact factor: 5.594

6.  [How should urologists perform implantation of subcutaneous central venous port systems? A single center experience of 347 cases].

Authors:  M Schenck; W Michels-Oswald; S Tschirdewahn; H Rübben; F Vom Dorp; A Rose; A Panic; C Niedworok; R Rossi
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2012-02       Impact factor: 0.639

Review 7.  Fracture and migration into the coronary sinus of a totally implantable catheter introduced via the right internal jugular vein.

Authors:  Bruno Soriano Pignataro; Kenji Nishinari; Nelson Wolosker; Guilherme Andre Zoteli Bomfim
Journal:  BMJ Case Rep       Date:  2014-12-01

Review 8.  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

9.  Long-term outcomes of totally implantable venous access devices.

Authors:  Yi-Chia Wang; Pei-Lin Lin; Wei-Han Chou; Chih-Peng Lin; Chi-Hsiang Huang
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2017-02-09       Impact factor: 3.603

10.  Is catheter rupture rare after totally implantable access port implantation via the right internal jugular vein? Report of a case.

Authors:  Yoshinobu Nagasawa; Tomoharu Shimizu; Hiromichi Sonoda; Hirotomi Chou; Eiji Mekata; Tohru Tani
Journal:  Surg Today       Date:  2013-06-04       Impact factor: 2.549

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.