Indications for venous access in oncology - recommendations of national professional societies and current state in the Czech Republic.

BACKGROUND The aim of the paper is to present the current recommendations and indications of venous access in oncology which reflect and recognize the opinions of national and international professional societies. It focuses exclusively on the indications of intravenous catheter placement for anticancer treatment, such as medium-term and long-term venous accesses. MATERIALS AND METHODS The survey results obtained from a national questionnaire of 24 oncology centers identified the current situation in the Czech Republic. There were evaluated relevant data on the number of and the criteria for the introduction of venous accesses provided by physicians. Comparisons were made between current oncological practice and recommendations provided by evidence-based medicine. RESULTS At each center surveyed in the Czech Republic, an average of 130 ports and 80 permanent implanted central catheters are introduced annually. The ports are increasingly indicated, with over a half of the centers surveyed introducing ports to more than 100 patients a year, with four centers introducing a total of 1,600 ports annually. In all centers, the decision for venous access is made by an oncologist. However, most procedures are performed by a doctor of another specialization, most often by a surgeon, a radiologist or an anesthesiologist. More than a half of the indications for venous access placement result from poor peripheral venous system or complications of parenteral therapy, not from comprehensive assessment prior to the initiation of the therapy. CONCLUSION Based on our findings, we developed general indications and recommendations for venous access to cancer patients which represent the consensus of an interdisciplinary team of specialists, predominantly from the committee of professional societies - the Society for Ports and Permanent Catheters, the Working Group of Nutritional Care in Oncology of the Czech Oncological Society and the Society of Clinical Nutrition and Intensive Metabolic Care. The number of introduced venous access catheters remains insufficient to meet the needs in the Czech Republic, which necessitates increased awareness and possibilities for safe drug administration.

[1]  R. Nataraja,et al.  Long peripheral catheters and midline catheters: Insights from a survey of vascular access specialists , 2020, The journal of vascular access.

[2]  D. Radice,et al.  Safe use of Peripherally Inserted Central Catheters for chemotherapy of solid malignancies in adult patients: A 1-year monocentric, prospectively-assessed, unselected cohort of 482 patients , 2020, The journal of vascular access.

[3]  S. Cesaro,et al.  In defense of the use of peripherally inserted central catheters in pediatric patients , 2020, The journal of vascular access.

[4]  J. Aguado,et al.  Peripherally inserted central venous catheter placed and maintained by a dedicated nursing team for the administration of antimicrobial therapy vs. another type of catheter: a retrospective case-control study. , 2020, Enfermedades infecciosas y microbiologia clinica.

[5]  Z. Fan,et al.  Utility of totally implantable venous access ports in patients with breast cancer , 2019, The breast journal.

[6]  H. Eldeeb,et al.  Predictive risk factors of venous thromboembolism (VTE) associated with peripherally inserted central catheters (PICC) in ambulant solid cancer patients: retrospective single Centre cohort study , 2019, Thrombosis Journal.

[7]  R. Nataraja,et al.  Long peripheral catheters: Is it time to address the confusion? , 2018, The journal of vascular access.

[8]  V. Chopra,et al.  Risk of venous thromboembolism associated with peripherally inserted central catheters: a systematic review and meta-analysis , 2013, The Lancet.

[9]  R. Dawson PICC Zone Insertion MethodTM (ZIMTM): A Systematic Approach to Determine the Ideal Insertion Site for PICCs in the Upper Arm , 2011 .

[10]  J. Macfie,et al.  ESPEN Guidelines on Parenteral Nutrition: central venous catheters (access, care, diagnosis and therapy of complications). , 2009, Clinical nutrition.

[11]  M. Gallieni,et al.  Vascular access in oncology patients , 2008, CA: a cancer journal for clinicians.

[12]  Dan M. Kluger,et al.  The risk of bloodstream infection in adults with different intravascular devices: a systematic review of 200 published prospective studies. , 2006, Mayo Clinic proceedings.

[13]  M. Shafir Vascular Access in Cancer Patients , 2000 .