Literature DB >> 26011202

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

Mehmet Aziret1, Oktay İrkörücü, Cihan Gökler, Enver Reyhan, Süleyman Çetinkünar, Timuçin Çil, Edip Akpınar, Hasan Erdem, Kamuran Cumhur Değer.   

Abstract

As part of the vascular access procedures, venous ports, commonly referred to as catheters, are placed under the skin to enable safe and easy vascular access for administration of repeated drug treatments. 122 patients who had received a venous port catheter insertion procedure in the general surgery department between January 1012 and January 2014 were involved in this study. Patients were divided into two groups: those who had undergone a fluoroscopy (group 1) and those who had not undergone a fluoroscopy (group 2). Complications that emerged during and after the port catheter insertion procedure and successful insertion rates were recorded in the database. Data of these patients were presented in a prospective manner. There were 92 to 30 patients in groups 1 and 2, respectively. In group 1, the mean age was approximately 56.8, total catheter stay time was 20,631 days, and mean time of port use was 224.2 days. In group 2, the mean age was approximately 61.2, total catheter stay time was 13,575 days, and mean time of port use was 452.5 days. Successful insertion rate was 100% and 90% in groups 1 and 2, respectively (P < 0.05). The proper insertion of the port catheter accompanied by monitoring methods can decrease procedure-related complications. Statistical comparisons between the two groups in terms of malposition and successful insertion rates also support this view (P < 0.05). The findings support the view that in cancer patients, a venous port catheter insertion accompanied by a fluoroscopy can be safely performed by general surgeons.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cancer; Infusion treatment; Port catheter

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26011202      PMCID: PMC4452970          DOI: 10.9738/INTSURG-D-14-00214.1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int Surg        ISSN: 0020-8868


  25 in total

1.  Subcutaneous venous port implantation in adult patients: a single center experience.

Authors:  Barbaros Erhan Cil; Murat Canyiğit; Bora Peynircioğlu; Tuncay Hazirolan; Selin Carkaci; Saruhan Cekirge; Ferhun Balkanci
Journal:  Diagn Interv Radiol       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 2.630

2.  Catheter fracture and cardiac migration--an unusual fracture site of totally implantable venous devices: report of two cases.

Authors:  Chia-Lo Chang; Hong-Hwa Chen; Shung-Eing Lin
Journal:  Chang Gung Med J       Date:  2005-06

3.  Morbidity after insertion of totally implantable venous access ports in oncological patients: results of a retrospective clinical study.

Authors:  Manuela Aspalter; Michael Lechner; Klaus Linni; Wolfgang Hitzl; Thomas Hölzenbein; Dietmar Ofner; Klaus Emmanuel
Journal:  Am Surg       Date:  2014-02       Impact factor: 0.688

4.  Jugular versus subclavian totally implantable access ports: catheter position, complications and intrainterventional pain perception.

Authors:  Cédric Plumhans; Andreas H Mahnken; Christina Ocklenburg; Sebastian Keil; Florian F Behrendt; Rolf W Günther; Felix Schoth
Journal:  Eur J Radiol       Date:  2010-03-12       Impact factor: 3.528

5.  Radiology-assisted placement of implantable subcutaneous infusion ports for long-term venous access.

Authors:  S L Morris; P F Jaques; M A Mauro
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1992-07       Impact factor: 11.105

6.  A retrospective clinical study: complications of totally implanted central venous access ports.

Authors:  June Pill Seok; Young Jin Kim; Hyun Min Cho; Han Young Ryu; Wan Jin Hwang; Tae Yun Sung
Journal:  Korean J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2014-02-05

Review 7.  Central venous catheter "pinch-off" and fracture: a review of two under-recognized complications.

Authors:  C S Nace; R J Ingle
Journal:  Oncol Nurs Forum       Date:  1993-09       Impact factor: 2.172

8.  Evaluation of formulas for optimal positioning of central venous catheters.

Authors:  C A Czepizak; J M O'Callaghan; B Venus
Journal:  Chest       Date:  1995-06       Impact factor: 9.410

Review 9.  Long-term outcome of radiological-guided insertion of implanted central venous access port devices (CVAPD) for the delivery of chemotherapy in cancer patients: institutional experience and review of the literature.

Authors:  J Vardy; K Engelhardt; K Cox; J Jacquet; A McDade; M Boyer; P Beale; M Stockler; R Loneragan; B Dennien; R Waugh; S J Clarke
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2004-09-13       Impact factor: 7.640

10.  Comparison of subcutaneous central venous port via jugular and subclavian access in 347 patients at a single center.

Authors:  Bilgin Kadri Aribaş; Kemal Arda; Ozge Aribaş; Nazan Ciledağ; Zeynel Yoloğlu; Elif Aktaş; Turgut Seber; Seyhmus Kavak; Yusuf Coşar; Hidir Kaygusuz; Ekrem Tekin
Journal:  Exp Ther Med       Date:  2012-07-30       Impact factor: 2.447

View more
  2 in total

1.  Complications and management strategies of totally implantable venous access port insertion through percutaneous subclavian vein.

Authors:  Yusuf Velioğlu; Ahmet Yüksel; Emrah Sınmaz
Journal:  Turk Gogus Kalp Damar Cerrahisi Derg       Date:  2019-10-23       Impact factor: 0.332

2.  Comparison of three types of central venous catheters in patients with malignant tumor receiving chemotherapy.

Authors:  Shirong Fang; Jinhong Yang; Lei Song; Yan Jiang; Yuxiu Liu
Journal:  Patient Prefer Adherence       Date:  2017-07-12       Impact factor: 2.711

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.