Literature DB >> 26175279

Evaluation of three different techniques for insertion of totally implantable venous access device: A randomized clinical trial.

Ana Paula Tagliari1, Fernanda Luiza Staub2, José Ricardo Guimarães1, Alceu Migliavacca1, Diego da Fonseca Mossmann1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Although totally implantable venous access devices (TIVAD) are increasingly being used in oncology patients, more robust evidence about the best technique is lacking, especially regarding to ultrasound (US) guided puncture.
METHODS: One hundred ten patients with indication of intravenous chemotherapy were randomly assigned to TIVAD implant through US-guided internal jugular vein (USG) puncture (39) or internal jugular vein blindly (IJB) (36) or subclavian vein blindly (SCB) (35). Procedure data and complications were prospectively recorded within 30 days of the procedure.
RESULTS: All patients completed the follow up. Immediate complication rate was 5.1%, 13.9%, and 0% in the USG, IJB, and SCB groups, respectively (P = 0.05). First attempt success rate was 79.5% in the USG, 52.8% in the IJB and 47.2% in the SCB group (P = 0.012). Technique failure was observed in 2.6%, 22.2%, and 8.6% of the population in the USG, IJB, and SCB, respectively (P = 0.021). Early complication rate was 5.1% in USG group, 2.8% in the IJB, and 0% in the SCB (P = 0.401).
CONCLUSION: The findings of our study suggest superiority of the USG approach in terms of first puncture success rate and technique failure, without increasing the procedure duration. Long-term follow-up results should help to further clarify the current debates.
© 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  central venous ports; chemotherapy; internal jugular vein; randomized trial; subclavian vein; ultrasound

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26175279     DOI: 10.1002/jso.23962

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Surg Oncol        ISSN: 0022-4790            Impact factor:   3.454


  6 in total

1.  Evaluation of the perceptions and cosmetic satisfaction of breast cancer patients undergoing totally implantable vascular access device (TIVAD) placement.

Authors:  Gabriel Liberale; Michel El Houkayem; Claire Viste; Fikri Bouazza; Michel Moreau; Issam El Nakadi; Isabelle Veys
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2016-08-05       Impact factor: 3.603

2.  Surgeon, not technique, defines outcomes after central venous port insertion.

Authors:  Audrey E Ertel; Zachary D McHenry; Vijay K Venkatesan; Dennis J Hanseman; Koffi Wima; Richard S Hoehn; Shimul A Shah; Daniel E Abbott
Journal:  J Surg Res       Date:  2016-11-04       Impact factor: 2.192

3.  Totally implantable venous access port insertion via open Seldinger approach of the internal jugular vein-a retrospective risk stratification of 500 consecutive patients.

Authors:  Felix Becker; Lennart A Wurche; Martina Darscht; Andreas Pascher; Benjamin Struecker
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2021-02-07       Impact factor: 3.445

4.  Local Anesthesia for Port Catheter Placement in Oncology Patients: An Alternative to Landmark Technique Using Ultrasound-Guided Superficial Cervical Plexus Block-A Prospective Randomized Study.

Authors:  Hakan Akelma; Fikret Salık; Mustafa Bıçak; Meral Erdal Erbatur
Journal:  J Oncol       Date:  2019-07-31       Impact factor: 4.375

5.  Cephalic vein approach for the implantable central venous access: A retrospective review of the single institution's experiences; Cohort Study.

Authors:  Jiyoung Rhu; Kang Woong Jun; Byung Joo Song; Kiyoung Sung; Jinbeom Cho
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2019-11       Impact factor: 1.817

Review 6.  Forty years after the first totally implantable venous access device (TIVAD) implant: the pure surgical cut-down technique only avoids immediate complications that can be fatal.

Authors:  Adriana Toro; Elena Schembari; Emanuele Gaspare Fontana; Salomone Di Saverio; Isidoro Di Carlo
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2021-06-09       Impact factor: 3.445

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.