Implantable central venous access system

Bothe, Albert; Piccione, William; Ambrosino, John J.; Benotti, Peter N.; Lokich, Jacob J.

doi:10.1016/0002-9610(84)90023-0

Cited by 127 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Four patients sustained pneu mothoraces (2 of whom required chest tube insertion) at the time of catheter placement. Infectious complications were uncommon and were comparable in frequency to previous reports with similar systems (13)(14)(15)(16), Com parison of these figures to those derived with other venous access systems may' be unfair, since series reporting data with the percutaneously tunneled Hickman or Broviac catheters predominantly include patients with acute leuke mia, a patient population with more prolonged periods of bone marrow suppression and, therefore, higher risk of in fection [3,8,9,17].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 70%

“…In a later report [15], the same group updated results in 35 patients, again with no major complications. Bothe et al [14] reported their findings in 74 patients, most of whom received infusional chemo therapy. There were 17 complications, 7 of which required removal of the catheter.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…Totally im plantable venous access devices became available in 1980 and could be useful for chemotherapy administration in patients with poor venous access [12]. Published data on complication rates and management have been limited to a few series with small patient numbers and relatively short follow-up periods [13][14][15][16]. This report represents the largest published experience with the Port-a-Cath, a totally implantable central venous access system, in a general oncology population.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 96%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Evaluation of an Implantable Venous Access System in a General Oncology Population

Barrios¹,

Zuke²,

Blaes³

et al. 1992

Oncology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Venous access has been a problem for the practicing oncologist. Previous approaches, such as arteriovenous fistulas, grafts, or percutaneous catheters, have not gained widespread acceptability. We report our experiences with 230 Port-a-Cath devices, a totally implantable venous access system. The catheters were placed in 218 general oncology patients for the administration of chemotherapy. One patient had three catheters placed and 10 patients had two catheters each. Most patients received standard bolus chemotherapy, while 25 patients were treated with continuous ambulatory infusions. The catheters were in place for an average of 271 days (range 2–1,427 days) for a total of 62,330 catheter days, representing the largest published experience with devices of this type in cancer patients. A total of 24 complications occurred in 22 patients. Catheter insertion was associated with four pneumothoraces, two of which required chest tube drainage. Five catheters were removed because of infection. There were 6 cases of venous thrombosis, but none resulted in pulmonary embolism. Other complications were manageable and included catheter occlusion, migration, and extravasation of chemotherapy agents. The Port-a-Cath is safe and is associated with a low rate of complications. Implantable venous access systems represent a significant advantage in the management of oncology patients with poor venous access.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 70%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 96%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Evaluation of an Implantable Venous Access System in a General Oncology Population

Barrios¹,

Zuke²,

Blaes³

et al. 1992

Oncology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…According to the literature, the average indwelling duration of the implanted devices varies from 61 to 512 d [7][8][9][10][11] . In this series, the total number of catheter-indwelling-days was 368 373 d and the median duration was 178 d.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

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

Hsieh

Weng

Huang

et al. 2009

WJG

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

AIM:To analyze the risk factors for central port failure in cancer patients administered chemotherapy, using univariate and multivariate analyses. 1.079-2.083, P = 0.016) when correlated with variables of age, sex and catheter type. Close-ended (Groshong) catheters had a lower thrombosis rate than open-ended catheters (2.5% vs 5%, P = 0.015). METHODS:Hematogenous malignancy had higher infection rates than solid malignancy (10.5% vs 2.5%, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION:Increasing age, male gender, openended catheters and hematogenous malignancy were risk factors for TIVAD failure. Close-ended catheters had lower thrombosis rates and hematogenous malignancy had higher infection rates.

show abstract

“…Since TIVADs appeared in the early 1980s, [1][2][3] anumber of reports have been published in oncology and other patient groups. Some studies have compared percutaneous and open techniques, [4][5][6][7][8][9] others specifically discussing TIVADs in cystic fibrosis patients.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%