Infections Related to Totally Implantable Venous-Access Ports: Long-Term Experience in One Center

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to investigate the incidence and risk factors of infections associated with totally implantable venous-access ports (TIVAPs) in our hospital. From April 2007 through November 2013, a total of 1,026 patients with TIVAP were included in this study. We retrospectively analyzed the incidence of port-related infection, patient characteristics, and history. Risk factors for IVAP-related infection were determined statistically. Overall, 97 (9.59 %) of 1,026 infectious cases were reported. By reviewing the medical record of the patients, we found that younger age, hematogenous malignancy, and palliative chemotherapy were associated with higher infection incidence rate in patients who had implanted TIVAP (P < 0.05) in the subgroup analysis. In contrast, gender and insertion site were irrelevant factors in predicting the infection risk. Overall, TIVAP were proved to be safe and effective. Younger age, hematogenous malignancy, and palliative chemotherapy were associated with higher infection in patients who had implanted TIVAP.

Infection of totally implantable venous access devices: A review of the literature

“…11 Nonetheless, TIVADs are not free from early and late complications. Infection is certainly the most relevant and one of the most common complications, being a frequent cause of removal, 2,3,7,12 thereby reducing the cost-effectiveness of the TIVAD itself and, more importantly, determining an increase in morbidity and mortality. [13][14][15][16] We reviewed current literature about TIVAD-related infections, providing insight into prevention and discussing the challenges associated with diagnosis and management of this relevant complication.…”

“…6,17,20 Indications for TIVAD placement may affect infection rate: palliative chemotherapy was found to be associated with a higher risk than adjuvant chemotherapy. 12,17,19 The use of port for PN also increases the risk of TIVAD-related infections, possibly because of PN itself, since both lipids and amino-acids favor bacterial colonization and biofilm formation or also because of the more frequent manipulations of the line associated with this kind of treatment. 25,38,61,67,69 As regards the site of port placement, insertion at the chest (chest-port) and in the upper limb (PICC-port) share an identical risk of infectious complications, 70 while ports placed with a femoral venous access (groin ports) have a higher infection risk.…”

Santral venöz portların çıkarılma nedenleri: Ardışık 154 hastadan edinilen deneyim

“…Bu amaçla geliştirilen santral venöz portlar, gerektiğinde parenteral nutrisyon ve kan ürünlerinin uygulanabilmesine ve kan örneklemelerinin yapılabilmesine de imkân verir. Aynı zamanda kolay erişilebilir ve kolay yerleştirilebilir olmaları sayesinde portlar onkoloji pratiğinde uzun yıllardır yaygın şekilde kullanılmaktadır (1,2). Port kullanımı ile kanser hastalarının yaşam kalitesinin arttığı, enfeksiyon riskinin ve kateterle ilişkili trombotik komplikasyonların azaldığı gösterilmiştir (3).…”

Accessing Totally Implantable Venous Access Systems on the day of Placement does not Significantly Increase the Risk of Infection

“…This led the Centers of Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the Society of Interventional Radiology (SIR) to recommend against routine use of pre-procedural antibiotics (14, 15). It has also been recently shown that hematologic malignancies and palliative chemotherapy led to higher infectious rates (10, 16).…”