Literature DB >> 8812530

Experience with the P.A.S.-PORT venous access device in patients with gynecologic malignancies.

G Deppe1, M L Kahn, V K Malviya, J M Malone, C W Christensen.   

Abstract

Experience with the P.A.S.-PORT, a peripherally implanted central venous access device, is evaluated in a retrospective review of 154 patients from July 1991 to June 1994. Blood could not be aspirated from six patients. Complications included temporary minor thrombophlebitis in seven patients (4.5%), symptomatic axillary or subclavian vein thrombosis in five patients (3.2%), clotted port in two patients (1.2%), port pocket cellulitis in two patients (1.2%), and fungal sepsis in two patients (1.2%). In six patients (3.8%) the P.A.S.-PORT had to be removed because of complications. The P.A.S.-PORT facilitated delivery of chemotherapy, parenteral nutrition, blood products, antibiotics, hydration, and blood sampling. It was demonstrated that the P.A.S.-PORT may be inserted and used with a low incidence of complications in gynecologic cancer patients.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8812530     DOI: 10.1006/gyno.1996.0246

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Gynecol Oncol        ISSN: 0090-8258            Impact factor:   5.482


  6 in total

Review 1.  Systematic review: malfunction of totally implantable venous access devices in cancer patients.

Authors:  Godelieve Alice Goossens; Marguerite Stas; Martine Jérôme; Philip Moons
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2011-05-10       Impact factor: 3.603

2.  Long-term outcomes of peripheral arm ports implanted in patients with colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Junichiro Kawamura; Satoshi Nagayama; Akinari Nomura; Atsushi Itami; Hiroshi Okabe; Seiji Sato; Go Watanabe; Yoshiharu Sakai
Journal:  Int J Clin Oncol       Date:  2008-08-15       Impact factor: 3.402

3.  Comparison of the Quality of Life of Patients with Breast or Colon Cancer with an Arm Vein Port (TIVAD) Versus a Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter (PICC).

Authors:  Brent Burbridge; Hyun Lim; Lynn Dwernychuk; Ha Le; Tehmina Asif; Amer Sami; Shahid Ahmed
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2021-04-09       Impact factor: 3.677

4.  Upper arm central venous port implantation: a 6-year single institutional retrospective analysis and pictorial essay of procedures for insertion.

Authors:  Masatoshi Shiono; Shin Takahashi; Yuichi Kakudo; Masanobu Takahashi; Hideki Shimodaira; Shunsuke Kato; Chikashi Ishioka
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-03-10       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Brachial insertion of fully implantable venous catheters for chemotherapy: complications and quality of life assessment in 35 patients.

Authors:  Igor Yoshio Imagawa Fonseca; Mariana Krutman; Kenji Nishinari; Guilherme Yazbek; Marcelo Passos Teivelis; Guilherme André Zottele Bomfim; Rafael Noronha Cavalcante; Nelson Wolosker
Journal:  Einstein (Sao Paulo)       Date:  2016 Oct-Dec

6.  A retrospective analysis on the utility and complications of upper arm ports in 433 cases at a single institute.

Authors:  Yukiko Mori; Satoshi Nagayama; Jun-Ichiro Kawamura; Suguru Hasegawa; Eiji Tanaka; Hiroshi Okabe; Megumi Takeuchi; Makoto Sonobe; Shigemi Matsumoto; Masashi Kanai; Manabu Muto; Tsutomu Chiba; Yoshiharu Sakai
Journal:  Int J Clin Oncol       Date:  2015-10-27       Impact factor: 3.402

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.