Outcome of cephalic vein cut-down approach: A safe and feasible approach for totally implantable venous access device placement

Koketsu, Shinichiro; Samesima, Shinishi; Yoneyama, Satomi; Okada, Toshiyuki; Tomozawa, Shigeru; Horikoshi, Hiroyuki; Sawada, Toshio

doi:10.3892/ol.2010.189

Cited by 15 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Studies showed that, compared with the SCV approach, the incidence of complications of the INV approach using surgical techniques for TIVAP is low, and it is considered superior to the SCV approach [17]. Koketsu et al [18, 19] also believed that TIVAP could provide safe and feasible infusion channels for patients through INV, which is worthy of promotion and application. However, surgical incision and implantation of TIVAPs also have the disadvantages of long operation time, low success rate, and great trauma [20].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ultrasound-guided totally implantable venous access ports via the right innominate vein: a new approach for patients with breast cancer

Qin

Zheng

et al. 2019

World J Surg Onc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundTo evaluate the feasibility and safety of ultrasound-guided totally implantable venous access port (TIVAP) implantation via the right innominate vein in patients with breast cancer.MethodsSixty-seven breast cancer patients underwent ultrasound-guided implantation of TIVAPs via the right innominate vein for administration of chemotherapy. Clinical data including technical success, success rate for the first attempt, periprocedural, and postoperative complications were recorded and retrospectively studied.ResultsAll patients underwent successful surgery. The success rate of the first attempt was 95.52% (64/67). The operation time was 28 to 45 min, with an average of 36 ± 6 min. Periprocedural complications included artery punctures in 1 (1.50%, 1/67) patient. Prior to this study, the mean TIVAP time was 257 ± 3 days (range 41 to 705 days). The rate of postoperative complications was 4.48% (3/67), including catheter-related infections in 1 case and fibrin sheath formation in 2 cases. Up to the present study, three people had unplanned port withdrawal due to complications, and the TIVAPs for 25 patients were still in normal use.ConclusionsThe success rate of ultrasound-guided TIVAPs via the right innominate vein is high with low complications, thus safe and feasible. This technique can provide a new option for chemotherapy of breast cancer patients.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ultrasound-guided totally implantable venous access ports via the right innominate vein: a new approach for patients with breast cancer

Qin

Zheng

et al. 2019

World J Surg Onc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Anatomic variations of basilic, cephalic or brachial vein frequently occur, and these peripheral vessels are much smaller in diameter as compared with central veins. These peripheral forearm vessels may be difficult to recognize or too limited in size to use 44. Therapeutic usage of peripheral venous access is frequent for oncologic and critically-ill patients, however, frequent puncture of these vessels leads to adhesion, spasm, or shrinkage, and thus complicates anatomy of surrounding structures.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

<p>Arm port vs chest port: a systematic review and meta-analysis</p>

Li¹,

Ma²,

Zheng³

2019

CMAR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Two prevailing, totally implantable venous access ports are routinely utilized in oncology: chest port or arm port. This systematic review with meta-analysis was conducted to compare safety and efficiency of the two techniques. Methods We performed evidence acquisition intensively from PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library. Available comparative studies that evaluated both techniques were identified. The outcomes of interest included total complication events, procedure-related infections, thrombosis, intra-operative complications, mechanical complications, conversion rate, early port removal, and operating time. Results Thirteen comparative studies including 3,896 patients (2,176 for chest ports, and 1,720 for arm ports) were identified. The present study showed that arm port was associated with higher procedure conversion rate (2.51% in chest port group and 8.32% in arm port group; odd ratios [OR] 0.27, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.15-0.46; p <0.001), but lower incidence of intra-operative complications (1.38% in chest port group and 0.41% in arm port group; OR 2.38, 95% CI 1.07–5.29; p =0.03). There were no between-group differences with respect to total complication events, procedure-related infections, thrombosis, mechanical complications, early port removal, and operating time. Subgroup analysis of patients under 60 years revealed that no significant difference was detected in intra-operative events (1.19% in chest port group and 0.02% in arm port group, OR 2.59, 95% CI 0.74–9.08; p <0.14), indicating that age may be a risk factor for intra-operative events. Sensitivity analysis did not change conclusions of all endpoints of interest. Conclusion Arm port is associated with higher procedure conversion rate, but lower incidence of intra-operative complications, and age may be a risk factor for intra-operative events.

show abstract

“…According to the previous studies, in comparison with the SCV approach, the incidence of complications of cephalic vein approach using surgical techniques for TIVAD is lower, and it is considered superior to the SCV approach [17–19]. KOKETSU et al [20, 21] also believe that TIVAD can provide safe and feasible infusion channels for patients through cephalic vein, which is worthy of promotion and application. However, surgical techniques for TIVAD also have the disadvantages of long operation time, low success rate, and great trauma.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison between ultrasound-guided TIVAD via the right innominate vein and the right internal jugular vein approach

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundTo compare the efficacy and safety of right internal jugular vein (IJV) approach and right innominate vein (INV) approach for US-guided totally implantable venous access devices (TIVADs), and to explore the advantages and disadvantages of the two approaches.MethodsSix hundred and nineteen adult patients had long-term infusion and chemotherapy needs and inconvenience of peripheral venous infusion. Right INV approach was used to implant 339 cases of TIVADs, and right IJV approach was used to implant 280 cases of TIVADs. The success rate of one-time catheterization and the incidence of complications in the two groups were retrospectively analyzed.ResultsAll patients were successfully implanted in TIVAD. The success rates of one-time puncture in INV group and IJV approach group were 98.53% (334/339) and 95.36% (267/280), respectively. There was significant difference between the two groups (P = 0.020). The incidence of perioperative complications and long-term complications in the right INV group were 1.18% (4/339) and 3.54% (12/339), respectively, while those in the right IJV group were 1.43% (4280) and 3.93% (11280). There was no significant difference in the incidence of perioperative or long-term complications between the two groups (P = 0.785, P = 0.799, respectively).ConclusionsUS-guided TIVADs via the right INV approach and the right IJV approach are both safe and reliable. The right INV approach improves the one-time puncture success rate, as long as the technique is properly operated, serious complications rarely occur.

show abstract

Outcome of cephalic vein cut-down approach: A safe and feasible approach for totally implantable venous access device placement

Cited by 15 publications

References 13 publications

Ultrasound-guided totally implantable venous access ports via the right innominate vein: a new approach for patients with breast cancer

Ultrasound-guided totally implantable venous access ports via the right innominate vein: a new approach for patients with breast cancer

<p>Arm port vs chest port: a systematic review and meta-analysis</p>

Comparison between ultrasound-guided TIVAD via the right innominate vein and the right internal jugular vein approach

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About