Complications and management strategies of totally implantable venous access port insertion through percutaneous subclavian vein.

Background The aim of this study was to present clinical characteristics, peri-procedural outcomes, early and late complications, and management strategies in patients undergoing totally implantable venous access port insertion through percutaneous subclavian vein. Methods A total of 2,084 port devices were inserted to 2,000 cancer patients (1,066 males, 934 females; mean age 58.4±12.7 years; range, 18 to 88 years) through subclavian vein using percutaneous landmark method between March 2012 and June 2018. Medical data including demographic features, primary diagnosis, technical success, procedural time, duration of device use, reasons for the device removal, and early and late complications were retrospectively analyzed. Results The most common type of cancer was colon cancer in males and breast cancer in females. Technical success rate of the procedure was 98.5%. Right subclavian vein was accessed in the majority of patients (92.4%). Early complications including inadvertent arterial puncture, catheter malposition, superficial hematoma, and pneumothorax occurred in 143 patients (6.9%), while late complications including infection, catheter occlusion, venous thrombosis, wound problems, catheter migration and embolization and pinch-off syndrome was developed in 118 patients (5.7%). Inadvertent arterial puncture in 63 patients (3%) was the most common early complication, while infection in 44 patients (2.1%) was the most common late complication. A total of 192 devices were removed due to the completion of chemotherapy or development of complications. Conclusion Our study confirmed the safety and tolerability of totally implantable venous access port insertion through percutaneous subclavian vein with high technical success and low complication rates.

[1]  Dong Hyun Kim,et al.  Evaluation of complications of totally implantable central venous port system insertion , 2019, Experimental and therapeutic medicine.

[2]  M. Fetohi,et al.  Complications of totally implantable venous access devices: experience with 852 Moroccan cancer patients , 2018 .

[3]  G. Villa,et al.  Infection of totally implantable venous access devices: A review of the literature , 2018, The journal of vascular access.

[4]  A. Fancellu,et al.  Cost and morbidity analysis of chest port insertion in adults: Outpatient clinic versus operating room placement , 2017, Annals of Medicine and Surgery.

[5]  J. Tseng,et al.  Totally Implantable Venous Access Devices: A Review of Complications and Management Strategies , 2017, American journal of clinical oncology.

[6]  M. Demirkol,et al.  Widespread Thrombus During Central Venous Catheterization in Ultrasonography: A Case , 2017 .

[7]  F. Basile,et al.  Totally implantable catheter migration and its percutaneous retrieval: case report and review of the literature. , 2017, Il Giornale di chirurgia.

[8]  M. Freire,et al.  Risk factors for infectious and noninfectious complications of totally implantable venous catheters in cancer patients. , 2016, Journal of vascular surgery. Venous and lymphatic disorders.

[9]  C. Geng,et al.  Totally implantable venous access port systems and associated complications: A single-institution retrospective analysis of 2,996 breast cancer patients. , 2016, Molecular and clinical oncology.

[10]  B. Pereira,et al.  Outcome of totally implantable venous-access port-related infections. , 2016, Medecine et maladies infectieuses.

[11]  C. Roldan,et al.  Central Venous Catheter Intravascular Malpositioning: Causes, Prevention, Diagnosis, and Correction , 2015, The western journal of emergency medicine.

[12]  T. Çil,et al.  Performance of venous port catheter insertion by a general surgeon: a prospective study. , 2015, International surgery.

[13]  Jung-Hyun Yang,et al.  Insertion of Totally Implantable Central Venous Access Devices by Surgeons , 2015, Annals of coloproctology.

[14]  O. Gur,et al.  Retrospective evaluation of totally implantable venous access port devices: early and late complications. , 2015, Journal of B.U.ON. : official journal of the Balkan Union of Oncology.

[15]  Tsuyoshi Mori,et al.  A comparison of outcomes and complications of totally implantable access port through the internal jugular vein versus the subclavian vein. , 2014, International surgery.

[16]  Young Jin Kim,et al.  A Retrospective Clinical Study: Complications of Totally Implanted Central Venous Access Ports , 2014, The Korean journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery.

[17]  P. Morel,et al.  Systematic review and meta‐analysis of percutaneous subclavian vein puncture versus surgical venous cutdown for the insertion of a totally implantable venous access device , 2014, The British journal of surgery.

[18]  M. Chae,et al.  Safety of a Totally Implantable Central Venous Port System with Percutaneous Subclavian Vein Access , 2013, The Korean journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery.

[19]  D. Mukherji,et al.  Update on totally implantable venous access devices. , 2012, Surgical oncology.

[20]  S. Bayrak Port catheter implantation under scopy in hybrid operation rooms , 2012 .

[21]  J. T. Kim,et al.  Clinical review and analysis of complications of totally implantable venous access devices for chemotherapy , 2012, Medical Oncology.

[22]  C. Fournier,et al.  Totally implantable venous access port systems and risk factors for complications: a one-year prospective study in a cancer centre. , 2011, European journal of surgical oncology : the journal of the European Society of Surgical Oncology and the British Association of Surgical Oncology.

[23]  W. Faraj,et al.  Complete catheter disconnection and migration of an implantable venous access device: the disconnected cap sign. , 2010, Annals of vascular surgery.

[24]  I. Di Carlo,et al.  Increased Use of Percutaneous Technique for Totally Implantable Venous Access Devices. Is It Real Progress? A 27-Year Comprehensive Review on Early Complications , 2010, Annals of Surgical Oncology.

[25]  S. Costa,et al.  An 11-year retrospective study of totally implanted central venous access ports: complications and patient satisfaction. , 2009, European journal of surgical oncology : the journal of the European Society of Surgical Oncology and the British Association of Surgical Oncology.

[26]  Chih-lu Han,et al.  Percutaneous retrieval of dislodged totally implantable central venous access system in 92 cases: experience in a single hospital. , 2009, European journal of radiology.

[27]  C. Araujo,et al.  A comparative study between two central veins for the introduction of totally implantable venous access devices in 1201 cancer patients. , 2008, European journal of surgical oncology : the journal of the European Society of Surgical Oncology and the British Association of Surgical Oncology.

[28]  H. Batirel,et al.  Complications and management of long-term central venous access catheters and ports , 2004, The journal of vascular access.

[29]  V. Vanek,et al.  Pinch-off Syndrome: Case Report and Collective Review of the Literature , 2004, The American surgeon.

[30]  C. Marosi,et al.  Central venous catheter pinch-off and fracture: recognition, prevention and management , 2003, Bone Marrow Transplantation.

[31]  P. Saip,et al.  Totally implantable venous-access ports: local problems and extravasation injury. , 2002, The Lancet. Oncology.

[32]  A. Guth Routine Chest X-Rays after Insertion of Implantable Long-Term Venous Catheters: Necessary or Not? , 2001, The American surgeon.

[33]  H. Kock,et al.  Implantable Vascular Access Systems: Experience in 1500 Patients with Totally Implanted Central Venous Port Systems , 1998, World Journal of Surgery.