Selim R Butros1, T Gregory Walker2, Gloria M Salazar2, Sanjeeva P Kalva2, Rahmi Oklu2, Stephan Wicky2, Suvranu Ganguli2. 1. Department of Imaging, Section of Interventional Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 55 Fruit Street, GRB 290, Boston, MA 02114. Electronic address: sganguli@partners.org. 2. Department of Imaging, Section of Interventional Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 55 Fruit Street, GRB 290, Boston, MA 02114.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate the indications, complications, and long-term results of translumbar port placements to the inferior vena cava for long-term central venous access in a single tertiary center. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective study included all patients with cancer who underwent translumbar port placement from January 2000 to July 2012; 31 patients (all women) with an average age of 53.1 years ± 11.1 (range, 30-77 y) were included in the study. Of these patients, 26 (81%) had breast cancer, 3 had lung cancer, 1 had ovarian cancer, and 1 had rectal cancer. Indications included central venous occlusion in 9 patients (29%) and bilateral mastectomy and lymph node dissection in 22 patients (71%). RESULTS: All procedures were technically successful. The overall 30-day complication rate was 9.7% (n = 3). Average catheter use was 14.1 months ± 21 (range, 0.75-108 mo). Thirteen (41.9%) ports were removed because they were no longer needed; 4 (12.9%) ports required removal for port malfunction; 12 (38.7%) patients died with their ports still in place; 2 (6.5%) ports remain in use. Three (9.7%) ports required delayed secondary intervention to remain functional. One patient had a systemic infection attributed to the port, resulting in an overall infection rate of 0.08 per 1,000 catheter days. CONCLUSIONS: Translumbar inferior vena cava port placement is a technically feasible and safe alternative method for long-term central venous access.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the indications, complications, and long-term results of translumbar port placements to the inferior vena cava for long-term central venous access in a single tertiary center. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective study included all patients with cancer who underwent translumbar port placement from January 2000 to July 2012; 31 patients (all women) with an average age of 53.1 years ± 11.1 (range, 30-77 y) were included in the study. Of these patients, 26 (81%) had breast cancer, 3 had lung cancer, 1 had ovarian cancer, and 1 had rectal cancer. Indications included central venous occlusion in 9 patients (29%) and bilateral mastectomy and lymph node dissection in 22 patients (71%). RESULTS: All procedures were technically successful. The overall 30-day complication rate was 9.7% (n = 3). Average catheter use was 14.1 months ± 21 (range, 0.75-108 mo). Thirteen (41.9%) ports were removed because they were no longer needed; 4 (12.9%) ports required removal for port malfunction; 12 (38.7%) patients died with their ports still in place; 2 (6.5%) ports remain in use. Three (9.7%) ports required delayed secondary intervention to remain functional. One patient had a systemic infection attributed to the port, resulting in an overall infection rate of 0.08 per 1,000 catheter days. CONCLUSIONS: Translumbar inferior vena cava port placement is a technically feasible and safe alternative method for long-term central venous access.