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

BACKGROUND: Since 1999 urologists at the University of Essen in Germany have performed subcutaneous implantation of venous port systems, controlled by intravasal ECG.
METHODS: Between December 1999 and June 2011 implantation of venous port systems was performed in 241 male (69.5%) and 106 (30.5%) female patients. The port systems were implanted subcutaneously above the pectoralis major muscle under local anesthesia. If it was not possible to isolate the cephalic vein or safe catheter implantation was not feasible, puncture of the subclavian vein was performed.
RESULTS: The median follow-up was 491.6 days (2-2568), and 163.254 catheter days (mean 239 days, range 2-2604) were documented. During the follow-up period 191 (55.1%) patients died. The mean surgical implantation and explantation time was 36.5 min (14-85 min) and 25.4 min (10-46 min), respectively; 79.7% were implanted and controlled by ECG. Altogether, 390 devices were used in 379 surgical procedures, 355 implantations (91.1%) and 35 explantations (8.9%). Implanted vessels were the cephalic vein in 303 patients (85.6%) and the subclavian vein in 51 (14.4%) patients. Of 35 explanted devices, the explantation was necessary due to complications in 28 (8.0%) cases: infection n=6 (1.7%, 0.036 per 1,000 catheter days), occlusion n=8 (2.3%, 0.049 per 1,000 catheter days), dislocation n=7 (2.0%, 0.042 per 1,000 catheter days), deep vein thrombosis of the upper extremity n=6 (1.7%, 0.037 per 1,000 catheter days), and clotting n=1(0.3%, 0.006 per 1,000 catheter days). Premature catheter removal (<30 days post-op) was required in six cases (1.9%, 0.036 per 1,000 catheter days) due to complications: three catheter dislocations/malfunctions (0.9%, 0.019 per 1,000 catheter days), one port-related infection, one pocket port infection, and one deep vein thrombosis of the upper extremity (0.3%, 0.006 per 1,000 catheter days). Other problems described in the literature like pneumothorax, vein perforation, or pinch-off syndrome did not occur.
CONCLUSIONS: Implantation of port systems with ECG control of the catheter tip position is related to a few cases of adverse events and good surgical outcomes. Furthermore, it has also shown great advantages in offering immediate support and early therapy initiation with a fast learning curve for the training urologists. The results of the presented analysis are comparable to those of surgical or radiological departments reported in the literature and provide good evidence that this procedure should be extended to urological centers with a high volume of chemotherapy patients.