Acceptance of External Infusion Pumps in Patients with Advanced Breast Cancer Receiving Continuous Infusion Fluorouracil

Background

We investigated the physical and psychological adaptation to a protracted continuous infusion system in a series of patients receiving protracted continuous infusion of 5-fluorouracil for advanced breast cancer.

Patients and methods

The protracted continuous infusion of 5-fluorouracil was administered by means of a portable elastomeric pump (Baxter Seven-Day Infusor, 0.5 mL/hr) via an indwelling Groshong catheter. Patients were asked to complete a questionnaire exploring the impact of the continuous infusion system upon various aspects of daily life, the overall level of disturbance, the general judgement on its quality, and their willingness to resume the same kind of treatment in the future. All items were graded on a 4-point scale from 0 = not at all, to 4 = very much.

Results

Seventy-one patients were evaluated. All patients received 5-fluorouracil at the dose of 250 mg/m2/day as a protracted continuous infusion alone (n = 14) or in combination with vinorelbine (n = 45) or Taxol (n = 12). The median duration of the protracted continuous infusion before evaluation was 9 months (3–31). The mean level of disturbance to daily activities was 0.86 points. The activities most frequently disturbed by treatment included daily personal care (mean, 1.76 points) and sexual activity (mean, 1.20 points). Twenty-one patients required medical intervention because of problems related to the protracted continuous infusion system. The overall level of disturbance was rated at a mean level of 0.72 points, whereas the overall merits of the protracted continuous infusion system and the willingness of the patient to resume protracted continuous infusion in the future were rated at a mean level of 2.90 and 2.55 points, respectively.

Conclusions

The system for the protracted continuous infusion of 5-fluorouracil was well tolerated by the patients, who were able in most cases to perform their daily activities with little or no disturbance, needing only occasional help, and were willing to resume the same treatment modality if necessary.

Gavecelt Consensus Statement on the Correct use of Totally Implantable Venous Access Devices for Diagnostic Radiology Procedures

The use of totally implantable venous access devices in radiology may be associated with complications such as occlusion of the system (because of the high density of some contrast), infection (if the port is not handled in aseptic conditions, using proper barrier protections), and mechanical complications due to the high-pressure administration of contrast by automatic injectors (so-called power injector), including extravasation of contrast media into the soft tissues, subintimal venous or myocardial injection, or serious damage to the device itself (breakage of the external connections, dislocation of the non-coring needle, or breakage of the catheter).

The last problem – i.e., the damage of the device from a power injection – is not an unjustified fear, but a reality. A warning by the US Food and Drug Administration of July 2004 reports around 250 complications of this kind, referring to both port and central venous catheters and peripherally inserted central catheter systems, which occurred over a period of several years; in all cases, the damage occurred during the injection of contrast material by means of power injectors for computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging procedures.

Though the risk associated with the use of ports in radiodiagnostics is thus clear, it has been suggested that administration of the contrast material via the port may have some advantage in terms of image quality, increased comfort for the patient, and maybe more accurate reproducibility of the patient's own follow-up exams. This contention needs to be supported by evidence.

Also, since many cancer patients who need frequent computed tomography studies already have totally implantable systems, it would seem reasonable to try to define how and when such systems may safely be used.

The purpose of this consensus statement is to define recommendations based on the best available evidence, for the safe use of implantable ports in radiodiagnostics.