Totally implantable venous access ports by cephalic vein cut-down for patients receiving chemotherapy
Keywords:
Implantable venous access devices; Cephalic vein cut-down; chemotherapyAbstract
Background: The use of an implantable room has become indispensable in the clinical practice for the cancer patients. The increasing use of these devices was associated with a greater incidence of complications.
Aim: To verify the feasibility of the cephalic vein cut-down technique for placement of venous access devices.
Methods: A prospective study of 58 port placements was performed at our department of general surgery. The surveillance of devices was collectively insured by the operator and by the oncologists.
Results: The indication for implantation was the infusion of intravenous chemotherapy in patients with colorectal cancer in 55.1% cases and breast cancer in 27.5%. The specific complication rate was 7%. The cephalic vein cut-down approach was used successful in 45 (77.5%) patients. When the cephalic vein could not be used, a percutaneous technique was employed using the subclavian vein in 22.4% of the patients.
Conclusion: Cephalic vein cut-down technique should be considered a safe and feasible approach for placement of venous access devices.
Downloads
References
Niederhuber JE, Ensminger W, Gyves JW, Liepman M, Cozzi RN. Totally implanted venous and arterial access system to replace external catheters in cancer treatment. Surgery. 1982; 92: 706-711.
Boulétreau P, Chassard D. Alimentation entérale précoce en chirurgie digestive. MAPAR Communications scientifiques 1996. Bruno Dartayet, Paris, 521-9.
Samaras P, Dold S, Braun J, et al. Infectious port complications are more frequent in younger patients with hematologic malignancies than in solid tumor patients. Oncology. 2008; 74: 237-44.
Groegger J, Lucas A, Thaler H, Brown A, Kiehn T, Amstrong B. Infections morbidity associated with long-term use of venous access devices in patients with cancer. Ann Intern Med. 1993; 119: 1168-74.
Ignatov A, Hoffman O, Smith B, et al. An 11-year retrospective study of totally implanted central venous access ports: complications and patient satisfaction. Eur J Surg Oncol 2009 ; 35 :241-6.
Hamilton HC, Foxcroft DR. Central venous access sites for the prevention of venous thrombosis, stenosis and infection in patients requiring long-term intravenous therapy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007; 3:CD004084.
Brothers T, Moll L, Niederhuber J, et al. Experience with subcutaneous infusion ports in three hundred patients. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1988; 166: 295-301.
Cappacioli L, Nistri M, Distante V, Rontini M, Manetti A, Stecco A. Insertion and management of long-term central venous device role of radiologic imaging techniques. Radiol Med. 1998; 96: 369-74.
D'Angelo FA, Ramacciato G, Aurello P, et al. Prospective randomized study of cephalic vein cut-down versus subclavian vein puncture technique in the implantation of subcutaneous venous access devices. Chir Ital. 2002; 54: 495-500.
La freniere R. Indwelling subclavian catheters and a visit with the « pinched-off sign ». J Surg Oncol. 1991 ; 47 : 261-4.
Conessa Cl; Talfer S; Herve S; Chollet O. Veine céphalique et chambre à cathéter implantable. Technique et suivi à long terme. Revue de laryngologie, d'otologie et de rhinologie. 2002 ; 123 : 143-48.
Le Saout J, Vallee B, Person H, Doutriaux M, Blanc J, Huu N. Bases anatomiques de l'utilisation chirurgicale de la veine céphalique. J Chir. 1983; 120: 131-4.
Chuter T, Starker PM. Placement of Hickman-Broviac catheters in the cephalic vein. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1988; 166: 163-4.
