Analysis of the Outcomes in Central Venous Access Port Implantation Performed by Residents via the Internal Jugular Vein and Subclavian Vein

Comparison of comfort and complications of Implantable Venous Access Port (IVAP) with ultrasound guided Internal Jugular Vein (IJV) and Axillary Vein/Subclavian Vein (AxV/SCV) puncture in breast cancer patients: a randomized controlled study

Background

Axillary vein/subclavian vein (AxV/SCV) and Internal jugular vein (IJV) are commonly used for implantable venous access port (IVAP) implantation in breast cancer patients for chemotherapy. Previous research focused on comparison of complications while patient comfort was ignored. This study aims to compare patient comfort, surgery duration and complications of IVAP implantation between IJV and AxV/SCV approaches.

Methods

Two hundred forty-eight breast cancer patients were enrolled in this randomized controlled study from August 2020 to June 2021. Patients scheduled to undergo IVAP implantation were randomly and equally assigned to receive central venous catheters with either AxV /SCV or IJV approaches. All patients received comfort assessment using a comfort scale table at day 1, day 2 and day 7 after implantation. Patient comfort, procedure time of operation as well as early complications were compared.

Results

Patient comfort was significantly better in the AxV/SCV group than that of IJV group in day 1 (P < 0.001), day 2 (P < 0.001) and day 7(P = 0.023). Procedure duration in AxV/SCV group was slightly but significantly shorter than IJV group (27.14 ± 3.29 mins vs 28.92 ± 2.54 mins, P < 0.001). More early complications occurred in AxV/SCV group than IJV group (11/124 vs 2/124, P = 0.019). No difference of complications of artery puncture, pneumothorax or subcutaneous hematoma between these two groups but significantly more catheter misplacement in AxV/SCV group than IJV group (6/124 vs 0/124, P = 0.029). Absolutely total risk of complications was rather low in both groups (8.87% in AxV/SCV group and 1.61% in IJV group).

Conclusions

Our study indicates that patients with AxV/SCV puncture have higher comfort levels than IJV puncture. AxV/SCV puncture has shorter procedure duration but higher risk of early complications, especially catheter misplacement. Both these two approaches have rather low risk of complications. Consequently, our study provides an alternative choice for breast cancer patients to reach better comfort.

Complications from port-a-cath system implantation in adults with malignant tumors: A 10-year single-center retrospective study

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Comparison of Central Venous Port Procedures Between Puncture vs. Cut-down and Residents vs. Senior Surgeons

BACKGROUND/AIM

To compare operative results between venous puncture (P) with real-time ultrasonography vs. cut-down (CD) with preoperative ultrasonography for totally implantable central vein access device (TICVAD) implantation performed by residents (R) vs. senior surgeons (S).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Adult oncologic patients (n=268) undergoing TICVAD implantations were retrospectively compared between 172 Ps and 96 CDs. Then, we compared Ps performed by R (P-R, n=131) and S (P-S, n=41) and CDs performed by R (CD-R, n=59) and S (CD-S, n=37).

RESULTS

Median operation times were 40 min in the P group and 53.5 min in the CD group, and times were significantly shorter for P-S and CD-S. Completion rates were comparable for each method and each surgeon. Intraoperative complication rates were 3.8% (P-R), 2.4% (P-S), and 0% (CD-R and CD-S).

CONCLUSION

P with real-time ultrasonography did not avoid complications compared to CD with preoperative ultrasonography. The latter performed safely even by residents.

An analysis of the outcomes of totally implantable access port implantation performed by surgical residents

Purpose

This study aimed to investigate the clinical outcomes after totally implantable access port (TIAP) implantation performed by general surgery residents in patients with colorectal cancer.

Methods

A total of 291 consecutive patients who underwent TIAP implantations were evaluated. The patients were divided into three groups: second-, third-, and fourth-grade residents.

Results

The mean follow-up was 22.1 months (range, 1-87 months). The total times of operation, puncture, and cannulation decreased as the resident grade increased (P<0.001). Early complications significantly decreased with higher resident grades (P=0.039). The non-use of ultrasonography and non-use of C-arm were identified as independent risk factors for complications. Resident grades between second and third (P=0.005) and between second and fourth (P=0.041) were identified as independent risk factors for optimal tip position.

Conclusion

TIAP implantation can be safely and effectively performed by residents. Low-grade residents were associated with early complications.

Outcomes following port-a-catheter placement in the Medicare population

Background

We aimed to evaluate the long-term complication profile associated with port-a-catheter placement.

Methods

Patients undergoing port-a-catheter placement from 2007 to 2012 with 5-year follow up were identified. Descriptive statistics, χ² tests, and multivariate regression models were analyzed.

Results

Any complication occurring within 5 years postoperatively was common (59.04%, n = 53,353). Arrhythmogenic (32.66%, n = 30,625) and thrombovascular (36.80%, n = 34,499) complications were more common than infection (17.86%, n = 16,745) and mechanical (10.31%, n = 9,670) complications. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that history of atrial fibrillation is a risk factor for developing any complication (odds ratio 7.99, 95% confidence interval 7.29-8.77).

Conclusion

Patients with history of atrial fibrillation have increased odds of developing infectious, thrombovascular, mechanical, and arrhythmogenic complications with port-a-catheter placement. This study is the first to show that postprocedure arrhythmias occur at significant rates within the 5-year follow-up period. We caution that development of new arrhythmia should be monitored throughout a prolonged follow-up period. We hope our analysis encourages multidisciplinary coordination of patients with ports so that implants are promptly removed when they are no longer needed to avoid these complications.

Late complications associated with totally implantable venous access port implantation via the internal jugular vein

PURPOSE

Several studies have analyzed late complications associated with totally implantable venous access ports (TIVAP) implantation via the internal jugular vein (IJV); however, the reported results are inconclusive. The aim of the study is to elucidate the characteristics and risk factors of late complications associated with TIVAP implantation via the IJV.

METHODS

The study included 482 patients who underwent TIVAP implantation for long-term chemotherapy and/or nutritional support between April 2012 and December 2017. Most patients (95.2%) had malignant diseases. Events requiring TIVAP removal were defined as TIVAP-related complications.

RESULTS

The median TIVAP and global follow-ups were 319 days (IQR 152-661) and 218,971 catheter days, respectively. The 3-year cumulative TIVAP availability rate was 70%. There were 44 complications (incidence of 9.1%; 0.201 complications/1000 catheter days). Infectious, catheter-related, and port-related complications occurred in 21, 14, and 9 patients, respectively with infectious complications occurring earlier and more frequently than catheter- and port-related complications. Multivariate analysis revealed that age < 65 years and presence of non-gastrointestinal diseases were significant unfavorable factors for TIVAP-related complications. Patients with 1 and 2 of these factors had an elevated risk (2.2 and 5.4 times, respectively) compared with those without.

CONCLUSIONS

Among the late complications associated with TIVAP implantation via the IJV, infectious complications occur earlier and more frequently than catheter- and port-related complications. Patients with an age < 65 years and having non-gastrointestinal diseases have a significantly high risk of TIVAP-related complications.

Central venous access ports in the interventional radiology suite - one-centre experience

Purpose

Central venous access ports (CVAP) are widely used to provide long-term vascular access for the delivery of chemotherapeutic medications. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical outcomes and complications following CVAP implantation in the interventional radiology suite.

Material and methods

A retrospective analysis was conducted on 937 oncology patients who underwent CVAP implantation between January 2009 and June 2017. Information regarding patient characteristics, operative data, and procedural outcomes was collected and analysed.

Results

A total of 937 patients scheduled for CVAP were included in the final analysis. Initial success was achieved in 930 patients (99.3%), and overall completion was achieved in 933 patients (99.6%). There were 63 complications overall. Among these, 19 (2.0%) occurred during the intra- and perioperative period and 44 were late complications (4.7%). No CVAP-related mortalities were observed.

Conclusions

The analysis in the present study revealed that the CVAP is a safe and effective route for long-term administration of chemotherapy with an overall complication rate of 6.7% throughout the entire device duration. The CVAP implantation procedure carried out in the interventional radiology suite provides an advantage in the management of procedural, vascular and catheter-related complications.

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

Background/Objectives

Most patients that require port operation have experienced severe pain due to multiple surgeries in the past. Therefore, these patients have fear of pain before the procedure. This study aims to compare superficial cervical plexus block (SCPB) with local infiltration anesthesia in terms of comfort.

Methods

100 cancer-diagnosed patients were divided into two groups. The first group, the landmark technique with local infiltration anesthesia, was used for intravenous entry (Group LM, n = 50). The second group, USG, was used for venous entry with SCPB as anesthesia (Group US, n = 50). The type of local anesthesia, port placement technique, duration of the procedure, number of procedures, complications, visual analog scale (VAS) score, and surgeon's satisfaction with the procedure were recorded.

Results

It was established that an average of 1.7 and 1.1 attempts was conducted in Groups LM and US, respectively (P = 0.010). VAS scores were found to be 4.04 in Group LM and 2.62 in GroupUS (P = 0.001). Surgeon satisfaction was 1.96 in GroupLM and 2.38 in GroupUS (P = 0.014). The mean duration of the procedure was 22.10 minutes in GroupLM and 43.50 minutes in GroupUS (P = 0.001). Complication rates were observed in 1 patient in GroupLM and 9 patient in GroupUS (P = 0.040).

Conclusions

In the patient group with a high level of pain and anxiety port catheter placement using USG and SCPB, supported by routine sedation, provides better comfort for both patient and surgeon.

Power-injectable totally implantable venous access devices - analysis of success and complication rates of ultrasound-guided implantation and a patient satisfaction survey

Background: To retrospectively evaluate the success rates, peri-interventional, early and late complications and patient satisfaction associated with power-injectable totally implantable venous access devices (TIVAPs). Patients and methods: Between April 2011 and March 2016, a total of 1,203 TIVAPs were implanted in 1,169 patients. Ultrasound-guided, fluoroscopically controlled implantation was performed through the subclavian or internal jugular vein. The systematic analysis focused on the rate of successful port implantations, the frequency of peri-interventional, early and late complications and on how the experience of the implanting radiologist impacts these parameters. Additionally, a standardized questionnaire was administered to the 102 study patients in a telephone interview to survey their subjective rating of the port implantation. Results: 99.5 % of TIVAPs were implanted successfully. In 4 out of 6 patients, the implantation was repeated successfully at a later time. Complication rates were 1.4 % (0.0512/1.000 catheter days) for peri-interventional, 2.9 % (0.081 per 1,000 catheter days) for early and 8.3 % (0.2288 per 1,000 catheter days) for late complications. The radiologist's experience level and vein selection did not have a significant impact. Most peri-interventional complications (82.4 %) were of minor severity. The early (61.5 %) and late (65.6 %) complications were more frequently of major severity. Interventions to manage complications comprised port explanation in 46.9 %, conservative therapy in 17.4 % and interventional therapy in 12.2 %. At 1 and 3 months after port placement, the majority were satisfied or very satisfied with the interventional port implantation. Conclusions: Ultrasound-guided, fluoroscopically controlled implantation of TIVAPs is a safe procedure with low complication rates, high success rates and high patient satisfaction.

The Safety Level of Total Central Venous Access Port Implantation Performed by Residents

OBJECTIVE

The implantation of totally implantable venous access ports (TIVAPs) is one of the first procedures surgical residents learn. Complications after implantation procedures have a major impact on patient outcomes, as it may lead to a delay of chemotherapy regimens or of parenteral nutrition. The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes after totally implantable venous access ports implantations done by resident and attending surgeons.

DESIGN

The study was performed as a retrospective analysis.

SETTING

The study took place in primary care at the Department of General and Visceral Surgery at Frankfurt University Hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 760 primary totally implantable venous access ports implantations performed between March 2008 and December 2016 were included in a database. Three groups of surgeons doing the implantations were defined: Group A (residents alone), Group B (resident with help), and Group C (attending surgeons).

RESULTS

There was a significant difference between the surgeon groups in operation time (p < 0.001). The groups differed between Group A (mean, 49; SD, 22) and Group C (mean, 39; SD, 20); p < 0.001) and Group B (mean, 53; SD, 23) and Group C (mean, 39; SD, 20; p < 0.001). The incidence of surgical site infections between Groups A and C (3.6% vs. 0.3%; p = 0.003) and Groups B and C (2.5% vs. 0.3%; p = 0.027) differed also significantly. Based on multivariable logistic regression analysis operation time in minutes (OR, 1.04; 95%CI, 1.03-1.06; p < 0.001) was an independent risk factor for any intraoperative complications. For any postoperative complications younger age of the patient (OR, 0.98; 95%CI, 0.97-0.99; p = 0.004) and benign primary disease (OR, 3.25; 95%CI, 1.55-6.64; p = 0.002) were independent risk factors based on multivariable regression analysis. Based on multivariable regression analysis a lower body mass index of the patient (OR, 0.93; 95%CI, 0.86-0.99; p = 0.044), benign primary disease (OR, 2.89; 95%CI, 1.07-7.79; p = 0.036), and no chemotherapy (OR, 3.55; 95%CI, 1.50-8.39; p = 0.004) were independent risk factors for postoperative catheter infections. Surgeon group was no risk factor, neither for intraoperative and postoperative complications, nor for catheter explantation due to complications.

CONCLUSION

Residents performing alone or residents performing with help can safely handle a central venous access port implantation. In patients with several risk factors, however, an attending should assist.

Complications after implantation of subcutaneous central venous ports (PowerPortⓇ)

BACKGROUND

The aim of our study was revised as follows: to clarify the postoperative complications of multifunctional central venous ports and the risk factors for such complications to promote the safe use of the PowerPort system in the hospital.

METHODS

The study group comprised 132 patients in whom implantable central venous access ports (PowerPort^Ⓡ) were placed in our hospital from March 2014 through December 2015. The approach used for port placement was the subclavian vein in 43 patients (33%), the internal jugular vein in 87 patients (66%), and the femoral vein in 2 patients (1%).

RESULTS

Postoperative complications occurred in 8 patients (6%). The catheter was removed because of infection in 4 patients and catheter kinking in 1 patient. Port extravasation occurred in 3 patients. No patient had catheter pinch-off. The mean operation time was 74 min (range, 32 to 171). No patients had intraoperative bleeding or pneumothorax. Benign disease was a risk factor for postoperative complications (p = 0.009).

CONCLUSION

PowerPort is a multifunctional port. Benign disease was a risk factor for postoperative complications. Because many types of subcutaneously implanted ports are used in our hospital, we had to inform the hospital staff about the functions of PowerPort.