Hasan Karanlik1, Sidika Kurul. 1. Department of Surgery, Institute of Oncology, Istanbul University, Istanbul, Turkey. hasankaranlik@yahoo.com
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to analyze the potential utilization of external jugular vein (EJV) cutdown approach for totally implantable venous access device (TIVAD) placement. METHODS: This is a prospective, non-randomized, observational, uni-institutional study. All patients (n = 451) were first subjected to attempted subclavian vein (SV) percutaneous approach. If SV percutaneous approach was unsuccessful after multiple puncture in group A and maximum two puncture in group B, an ipsilateral EJV cutdown approach was attempted. RESULTS: Four hundred four patients (89.6%) underwent TIVAD placement via SV percutaneous approach. Of those 47 patients in which SV percutaneous approach was not successful, 8 patients in group A and 39 patients in group B, TIVAD was placed via ipsilateral EJV cutdown approach. The average of operative time was 17.9 +/- 8.5 min in group A and 18 +/- 7.3 min in group B (P > 0.05). The early complications of group A were significantly higher than that of group B (P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: TIVAD placement by the SV percutaneous approach is safe and fast, and its success rate is very high. By avoiding the immediate complications associated with the percutaneous approach, the EJV cutdown has to be considered a valid, safe, and suitable alternative when the SV percutaneous approach unsuccessful after two needle puncture.
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to analyze the potential utilization of external jugular vein (EJV) cutdown approach for totally implantable venous access device (TIVAD) placement. METHODS: This is a prospective, non-randomized, observational, uni-institutional study. All patients (n = 451) were first subjected to attempted subclavian vein (SV) percutaneous approach. If SV percutaneous approach was unsuccessful after multiple puncture in group A and maximum two puncture in group B, an ipsilateral EJV cutdown approach was attempted. RESULTS: Four hundred four patients (89.6%) underwent TIVAD placement via SV percutaneous approach. Of those 47 patients in which SV percutaneous approach was not successful, 8 patients in group A and 39 patients in group B, TIVAD was placed via ipsilateral EJV cutdown approach. The average of operative time was 17.9 +/- 8.5 min in group A and 18 +/- 7.3 min in group B (P > 0.05). The early complications of group A were significantly higher than that of group B (P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: TIVAD placement by the SV percutaneous approach is safe and fast, and its success rate is very high. By avoiding the immediate complications associated with the percutaneous approach, the EJV cutdown has to be considered a valid, safe, and suitable alternative when the SV percutaneous approach unsuccessful after two needle puncture.