Literature DB >> 9301441

Long-term, totally implantable central venous access ports connected to a Groshong catheter for chemotherapy of solid tumours: experience from 178 cases using a single type of device.

R Biffi1, F Corrado, F de Braud, F de Lucia, D Scarpa, A Testori, F Orsi, M Bellomi, S Mauri, M Aapro, B Andreoni.   

Abstract

The aim of this study was to examine the early and late complications rate of central venous access ports connected to the Groshong catheter for long-term chemotherapy delivering. All patients suffering from a neoplastic disease, who required long-term chemotherapy and underwent insertion of implantable ports during a 21-month period (1 October 1994-30 June 1996) were prospectively studied. A single type of port was used, constructed of titanium and silicone rubber (Dome Port, Bard Inc., Salt Lake City, U.S.A), connected to an 8 F silastic Groshong catheter tubing (Bard Inc.). A team of different operators (two general surgeons, one interventional radiologist and four anaesthesiologists) was involved in inserting the port. All devices were placed in the operating room under fluoroscopic control. A central venous access form was filled in by the operator after the procedure and all ports were followed prospectively for device-related and overall complications. Data from the follow-up of these patients were entered in the form and collected in a database. Follow-up continued until the device was removed, the patient died or the study was closed. 178 devices, comprising a total of 32,089 days in situ, were placed in 175 patients. Three patients received a second device after removal of the first. Adequate follow-up was obtained in all cases (median 180 days, range 4-559). 138 devices (77.5%) were still in situ when the study was closed. Early complications included six pneumothoraxes, three arterial punctures and two revisions for port and/or catheter malfunction (overall early complications in 8 patients). Late complications included 3 cases (1.68% of devices) of catheter rupture and embolisation (0.093 episodes/1000 days of use), 2 cases (1.12% of devices) of venous thrombosis (0.062 episodes/1000 days of use), 1 case (0.56% of devices) of pocket infection (0.031 episodes/1000 days of use), and 4 cases (2.24% of devices) of port-related bacteraemias (0.124 episodes/1000 days of use). Infections were caused by coagulase-negative Staphylococcus aureus (4 cases) and Bacillus subtilis (1 case); they required port removal in 3 out of 5 cases. This study represents the largest published series of patients with totally implantable access ports connected to Groshong catheters; this device is a good option for long-term access to central veins and delivery of chemotherapeutic regimens, including continuous intravenous infusions. The low incidence of major complications related to implantation and management of these devices support increased use in oncology patients.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1997        PMID: 9301441     DOI: 10.1016/s0959-8049(97)00039-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Cancer        ISSN: 0959-8049            Impact factor:   9.162


  22 in total

1.  Catheter Fracture of Subclavian Venous Chemoport Device at Costoclavicular Junction: Pinch-off Syndrome.

Authors:  Vineet Goel; Naveen Kumar; Vivek Saxena; Harit Chaturvedi
Journal:  Indian J Surg Oncol       Date:  2018-07-30

2.  Clearing obstructed totally implantable central venous access ports: an efficient protocol using a second needle.

Authors:  Sonia Muguet; Sébastien Couraud; Emilie Perrot; Isabelle Claer; Pierre Jean Souquet
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2012-03-02       Impact factor: 3.603

3.  Choosing the appropriate side for subcutaneous port catheter placement in patients with mastectomy: ipsilateral or contralateral?

Authors:  Omer Fatih Nas; Kadir Hacikurt; Ahmet Kaya; Nurullah Dogan; Bekir Sanal; Guven Ozkaya; Halit Ziya Dundar; Cuneyt Erdogan
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2017-02-17       Impact factor: 3.469

4.  A randomized trial of valved vs nonvalved implantable ports for vascular access.

Authors:  Jeffrey P Lamont; Todd M McCarty; Jeffrey S Stephens; Bruce A Smith; John Carlo; Sheryl Livingston; Joseph A Kuhn
Journal:  Proc (Bayl Univ Med Cent)       Date:  2003-10

5.  No impact of central venous insertion site on oncology patients' quality of life and psychological distress. A randomized three-arm trial.

Authors:  Roberto Biffi; Franco Orsi; Simonetta Pozzi; Andrea Maldifassi; Davide Radice; Nicole Rotmensz; Maria Giulia Zampino; Nicola Fazio; Giulia Peruzzotti; Florence Didier
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2010-08-28       Impact factor: 3.603

6.  Subcutaneous infusion ports via the internal jugular vein: single center experience.

Authors:  Bulent Karaman; Cagatay Andic; Nisa Cem Oren; Bilal Battal; Bahri Ustunsoz
Journal:  Eurasian J Med       Date:  2010-08

7.  Analysis of risk factors for central venous port failure in cancer patients.

Authors:  Ching-Chuan Hsieh; Hsu-Huei Weng; Wen-Shih Huang; Wen-Ke Wang; Chiung-Lun Kao; Ming-Shian Lu; Chia-Siu Wang
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2009-10-07       Impact factor: 5.742

8.  Patients' perceptions of having a central venous catheter or a totally implantable subcutaneous port system-results from a randomised study in acute leukaemia.

Authors:  Eva Johansson; Per Engervall; Hjördis Björvell; Robert Hast; Magnus Björkholm
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2008-05-01       Impact factor: 3.603

Review 9.  Surgical placement of totally implantable venous access device-an institutional experience.

Authors:  Aravindan Chandrasekaran; Jayabose Somasundaram
Journal:  Indian J Pediatr       Date:  2013-08-14       Impact factor: 1.967

Review 10.  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

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.