Comparison of Two Techniques in Central Venous Port Application

Aim: Central venous access devices (CVADs) have been used for prolonged infusion chemotherapy and have facilitated the problem of vascular access. The aims of this study were to analyse the results and complications of two CVAD implantation techniques. Methods: We performed a retrospective study of...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Haseki tıp bülteni 2019-03, Vol.57 (1), p.9
Hauptverfasser: Dinçer, Mürşit, Kocakuşak, Ahmet, Hut, Adnan, Gür, Ümit, Çıtlak, Gamze, Akıncı, Muzaffer
Format: Artikel
Sprache:tur
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page
container_issue 1
container_start_page 9
container_title Haseki tıp bülteni
container_volume 57
creator Dinçer, Mürşit
Kocakuşak, Ahmet
Hut, Adnan
Gür, Ümit
Çıtlak, Gamze
Akıncı, Muzaffer
description Aim: Central venous access devices (CVADs) have been used for prolonged infusion chemotherapy and have facilitated the problem of vascular access. The aims of this study were to analyse the results and complications of two CVAD implantation techniques. Methods: We performed a retrospective study of 118 implantable venous access devices inserted via the subclavian vein using two different surgical techniques between January 2015 and June 2017 in İstanbul Haseki Training and Research Hospital, Clinic of General Surgery. While the devices were placed under fluoroscopic guidance in group 1, they were placed without fluoroscopy in group 2. All procedures were performed under sedation and local anesthesia. All devices were placed at the anterior chest wall over the pectoralis fascia. Outcome and complications were followed and recorded elaborately. Results: A total of 118 venous access devices were implanted. During follow-up, a total of eight complications were observed. Pneumothorax was observed in five, wound infection in two and catheter fracture was observed in one patient. There was no statistically significant difference in complications between the two groups. Conclusion: CVADs increase quality of life of patients with oncologic diseases during chemotherapy. Common periprocedural complications of CVADs are pneumothorax, wound infection and catheter occlusion. In critical patients, the use of fluoroscopy may be helpful in reducing complications. However, since fluoroscopy increases costs and requires experience, CVAD insertion under fluoroscopy guidance may not always be possible. There is also a risk of radiation exposure when using fluoroscopy. In regard to comparison of the two techniques, fluoroscopy guidance did not alter the results and its superiority over the other technique was not observed. Although image-guided insertion of subcutaneous chest ports has advantages over unguided insertion, the latter can be used in a selected group of patients in experienced hands.
doi_str_mv 10.4274/haseki.galenos.2018.4459
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2258192226</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2258192226</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-proquest_journals_22581922263</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNjUEKwjAURIMoWLR3-OC6NflGm65EiuLSRXFbgqQarfk1afH6VvAAzmYWb3jDGAieSszk8qaDedj0qhvjKKTIhUqlXOcjFqGQWYIbpcYsEiuOCecZTlkcwp0PkbkQSkVsW9Cz1d4GckA1lG-C0lxuzr56E8A6KIzrvG7gPDz0AU7kO9i1bWMvurPk5mxS6yaY-Ncztjjsy-KYtJ6-iq66U-_dgCrEtRI5Im5W_60-BRdDnQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2258192226</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparison of Two Techniques in Central Venous Port Application</title><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><creator>Dinçer, Mürşit ; Kocakuşak, Ahmet ; Hut, Adnan ; Gür, Ümit ; Çıtlak, Gamze ; Akıncı, Muzaffer</creator><creatorcontrib>Dinçer, Mürşit ; Kocakuşak, Ahmet ; Hut, Adnan ; Gür, Ümit ; Çıtlak, Gamze ; Akıncı, Muzaffer</creatorcontrib><description>Aim: Central venous access devices (CVADs) have been used for prolonged infusion chemotherapy and have facilitated the problem of vascular access. The aims of this study were to analyse the results and complications of two CVAD implantation techniques. Methods: We performed a retrospective study of 118 implantable venous access devices inserted via the subclavian vein using two different surgical techniques between January 2015 and June 2017 in İstanbul Haseki Training and Research Hospital, Clinic of General Surgery. While the devices were placed under fluoroscopic guidance in group 1, they were placed without fluoroscopy in group 2. All procedures were performed under sedation and local anesthesia. All devices were placed at the anterior chest wall over the pectoralis fascia. Outcome and complications were followed and recorded elaborately. Results: A total of 118 venous access devices were implanted. During follow-up, a total of eight complications were observed. Pneumothorax was observed in five, wound infection in two and catheter fracture was observed in one patient. There was no statistically significant difference in complications between the two groups. Conclusion: CVADs increase quality of life of patients with oncologic diseases during chemotherapy. Common periprocedural complications of CVADs are pneumothorax, wound infection and catheter occlusion. In critical patients, the use of fluoroscopy may be helpful in reducing complications. However, since fluoroscopy increases costs and requires experience, CVAD insertion under fluoroscopy guidance may not always be possible. There is also a risk of radiation exposure when using fluoroscopy. In regard to comparison of the two techniques, fluoroscopy guidance did not alter the results and its superiority over the other technique was not observed. Although image-guided insertion of subcutaneous chest ports has advantages over unguided insertion, the latter can be used in a selected group of patients in experienced hands.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1302-0072</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2147-2688</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.4274/haseki.galenos.2018.4459</identifier><language>tur</language><publisher>Istanbul: Galenos Publishing House</publisher><subject>Blood products ; Cancer therapies ; Catheters ; Chemotherapy ; Hospitals ; Infections ; Mortality ; Neutropenia ; Patients ; Sepsis ; Statistical analysis</subject><ispartof>Haseki tıp bülteni, 2019-03, Vol.57 (1), p.9</ispartof><rights>2019. This work is published under https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,777,781,861,27905,27906</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Dinçer, Mürşit</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kocakuşak, Ahmet</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hut, Adnan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gür, Ümit</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Çıtlak, Gamze</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Akıncı, Muzaffer</creatorcontrib><title>Comparison of Two Techniques in Central Venous Port Application</title><title>Haseki tıp bülteni</title><description>Aim: Central venous access devices (CVADs) have been used for prolonged infusion chemotherapy and have facilitated the problem of vascular access. The aims of this study were to analyse the results and complications of two CVAD implantation techniques. Methods: We performed a retrospective study of 118 implantable venous access devices inserted via the subclavian vein using two different surgical techniques between January 2015 and June 2017 in İstanbul Haseki Training and Research Hospital, Clinic of General Surgery. While the devices were placed under fluoroscopic guidance in group 1, they were placed without fluoroscopy in group 2. All procedures were performed under sedation and local anesthesia. All devices were placed at the anterior chest wall over the pectoralis fascia. Outcome and complications were followed and recorded elaborately. Results: A total of 118 venous access devices were implanted. During follow-up, a total of eight complications were observed. Pneumothorax was observed in five, wound infection in two and catheter fracture was observed in one patient. There was no statistically significant difference in complications between the two groups. Conclusion: CVADs increase quality of life of patients with oncologic diseases during chemotherapy. Common periprocedural complications of CVADs are pneumothorax, wound infection and catheter occlusion. In critical patients, the use of fluoroscopy may be helpful in reducing complications. However, since fluoroscopy increases costs and requires experience, CVAD insertion under fluoroscopy guidance may not always be possible. There is also a risk of radiation exposure when using fluoroscopy. In regard to comparison of the two techniques, fluoroscopy guidance did not alter the results and its superiority over the other technique was not observed. Although image-guided insertion of subcutaneous chest ports has advantages over unguided insertion, the latter can be used in a selected group of patients in experienced hands.</description><subject>Blood products</subject><subject>Cancer therapies</subject><subject>Catheters</subject><subject>Chemotherapy</subject><subject>Hospitals</subject><subject>Infections</subject><subject>Mortality</subject><subject>Neutropenia</subject><subject>Patients</subject><subject>Sepsis</subject><subject>Statistical analysis</subject><issn>1302-0072</issn><issn>2147-2688</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2019</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><recordid>eNqNjUEKwjAURIMoWLR3-OC6NflGm65EiuLSRXFbgqQarfk1afH6VvAAzmYWb3jDGAieSszk8qaDedj0qhvjKKTIhUqlXOcjFqGQWYIbpcYsEiuOCecZTlkcwp0PkbkQSkVsW9Cz1d4GckA1lG-C0lxuzr56E8A6KIzrvG7gPDz0AU7kO9i1bWMvurPk5mxS6yaY-Ncztjjsy-KYtJ6-iq66U-_dgCrEtRI5Im5W_60-BRdDnQ</recordid><startdate>20190301</startdate><enddate>20190301</enddate><creator>Dinçer, Mürşit</creator><creator>Kocakuşak, Ahmet</creator><creator>Hut, Adnan</creator><creator>Gür, Ümit</creator><creator>Çıtlak, Gamze</creator><creator>Akıncı, Muzaffer</creator><general>Galenos Publishing House</general><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20190301</creationdate><title>Comparison of Two Techniques in Central Venous Port Application</title><author>Dinçer, Mürşit ; Kocakuşak, Ahmet ; Hut, Adnan ; Gür, Ümit ; Çıtlak, Gamze ; Akıncı, Muzaffer</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-proquest_journals_22581922263</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>tur</language><creationdate>2019</creationdate><topic>Blood products</topic><topic>Cancer therapies</topic><topic>Catheters</topic><topic>Chemotherapy</topic><topic>Hospitals</topic><topic>Infections</topic><topic>Mortality</topic><topic>Neutropenia</topic><topic>Patients</topic><topic>Sepsis</topic><topic>Statistical analysis</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Dinçer, Mürşit</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kocakuşak, Ahmet</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hut, Adnan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gür, Ümit</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Çıtlak, Gamze</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Akıncı, Muzaffer</creatorcontrib><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><jtitle>Haseki tıp bülteni</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Dinçer, Mürşit</au><au>Kocakuşak, Ahmet</au><au>Hut, Adnan</au><au>Gür, Ümit</au><au>Çıtlak, Gamze</au><au>Akıncı, Muzaffer</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparison of Two Techniques in Central Venous Port Application</atitle><jtitle>Haseki tıp bülteni</jtitle><date>2019-03-01</date><risdate>2019</risdate><volume>57</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>9</spage><pages>9-</pages><issn>1302-0072</issn><eissn>2147-2688</eissn><abstract>Aim: Central venous access devices (CVADs) have been used for prolonged infusion chemotherapy and have facilitated the problem of vascular access. The aims of this study were to analyse the results and complications of two CVAD implantation techniques. Methods: We performed a retrospective study of 118 implantable venous access devices inserted via the subclavian vein using two different surgical techniques between January 2015 and June 2017 in İstanbul Haseki Training and Research Hospital, Clinic of General Surgery. While the devices were placed under fluoroscopic guidance in group 1, they were placed without fluoroscopy in group 2. All procedures were performed under sedation and local anesthesia. All devices were placed at the anterior chest wall over the pectoralis fascia. Outcome and complications were followed and recorded elaborately. Results: A total of 118 venous access devices were implanted. During follow-up, a total of eight complications were observed. Pneumothorax was observed in five, wound infection in two and catheter fracture was observed in one patient. There was no statistically significant difference in complications between the two groups. Conclusion: CVADs increase quality of life of patients with oncologic diseases during chemotherapy. Common periprocedural complications of CVADs are pneumothorax, wound infection and catheter occlusion. In critical patients, the use of fluoroscopy may be helpful in reducing complications. However, since fluoroscopy increases costs and requires experience, CVAD insertion under fluoroscopy guidance may not always be possible. There is also a risk of radiation exposure when using fluoroscopy. In regard to comparison of the two techniques, fluoroscopy guidance did not alter the results and its superiority over the other technique was not observed. Although image-guided insertion of subcutaneous chest ports has advantages over unguided insertion, the latter can be used in a selected group of patients in experienced hands.</abstract><cop>Istanbul</cop><pub>Galenos Publishing House</pub><doi>10.4274/haseki.galenos.2018.4459</doi><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1302-0072
ispartof Haseki tıp bülteni, 2019-03, Vol.57 (1), p.9
issn 1302-0072
2147-2688
language tur
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_2258192226
source DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals
subjects Blood products
Cancer therapies
Catheters
Chemotherapy
Hospitals
Infections
Mortality
Neutropenia
Patients
Sepsis
Statistical analysis
title Comparison of Two Techniques in Central Venous Port Application
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-18T23%3A31%3A36IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparison%20of%20Two%20Techniques%20in%20Central%20Venous%20Port%20Application&rft.jtitle=Haseki%20t%C4%B1p%20b%C3%BClteni&rft.au=Din%C3%A7er,%20M%C3%BCr%C5%9Fit&rft.date=2019-03-01&rft.volume=57&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=9&rft.pages=9-&rft.issn=1302-0072&rft.eissn=2147-2688&rft_id=info:doi/10.4274/haseki.galenos.2018.4459&rft_dat=%3Cproquest%3E2258192226%3C/proquest%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2258192226&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true