 |
|
Reliability of Implantable Central Venous Access Devices in Patients With Cancer
Gregory V. Stanislav, MD;
Robert J. Fitzgibbons, Jr, MD;
Robert T. Bailey, Jr, PharmD;
James A. Mailliard, MD;
P. Steven Johnson, MD;
John B. Feole
Arch Surg. 1987;122(11):1280-1283.
Abstract
| |
• We reviewed complications requiring removal of Hickman catheters (HCs) and implantable central venous access devices (ICVADs) in patients with cancer over a 30-month period. The study was unique in the sense that patients chose which system would be inserted, unless continuous infusion was anticipated. A total of 115 systems were inserted in 102 patients. Forty-four HCs were inserted in 34 patients (total system days, 8533 [mean, 194 days]); 71 ICVADs were inserted in 68 patients (total system days, 18681 [mean, 263 days]). Complications required removal in 38.6% of HCs and 18.3% of ICVADs. Complication rates were one in 501 days in the HC group and one in 1450 days in the ICVAD group. Although 15 systems were removed for suspected infection, closer analysis revealed that bacteremia ultimately found to be unrelated to the catheter resulted in premature removal in many cases. The catheter tip was located high in the superior vena cava or in the subclavian vein in all systems removed due to thrombosis. Miscellaneous complications in HCs included dislodgment and catheter embolism. The increased longevity, lower complication rate, and decreased maintenance requirements in the use of ICVADs support their superiority over HCs in the treatment of patients with cancer.
(Arch Surg 1987;122:1280-1283)
Author Affiliations
From the Departments of Surgery (Drs Stanislav, Fitzgibbons, and Bailey, and Mr Feole) and Medicine (Drs Mailliard and Johnson), Creighton University School of Medicine, Omaha.
Footnotes
Accepted for publication July 13, 1987.
Read before the Annual Meeting of the Society of Surgical Oncology, London, April 30, 1987.
Reprint requests to Department of Surgery, Suite 3740, Creighton University School of Medicine, 601 N 30th St, Omaha, NE 68131 (Dr Fitzgibbons).
 CiteULike  Connotea  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Technorati  Twitter
What's this?
THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES
|
Thrombotic Complications of Central Venous Catheters in Cancer Patients
Kuter
The Oncologist 2004;9:207-216.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Use of totally implantable central venous access ports for high-dose chemotherapy and peripheral blood stem cell transplantation: results of a monocentre series of 376 patients
Biffi et al.
Ann Oncol 2004;15:296-300.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Venous Thromboembolism Associated With Long-Term Use of Central Venous Catheters in Cancer Patients
Verso and Agnelli
JCO 2003;21:3665-3675.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Catheter-related Upper Extremity Deep Venous Thrombosis in Cancer Patients: A Prospective Study Based on Doppler US
Luciani et al.
Radiology 2001;220:655-660.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Editorial II: Safe placement of central venous catheters: where should the tip of the catheter lie?
Br J Anaesth 2000;85:188-191.
FULL TEXT
Totally Implantable Venous Access Ports Systems for Patients Receiving Chemotherapy for Solid Tissue Malignancies: A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial Examining the Safety, Efficacy, Costs, and Impact on Quality of Life
Bow et al.
JCO 1999;17:1267-1267.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Urokinase Infusion for Thrombosed Catheters
Krzywda et al.
JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr 1992;16:596-596.
Ten-Year Survival of a Broviac Catheter
Heimburger
Nutr Clin Pract 1992;7:74-76.
ABSTRACT
Breakage of an Embolized Intravascular Catheter Fragment: A Complication of Nonsurgical Transvenous Retrieval
Bauch et al.
JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr 1992;16:175-177.
ABSTRACT
Spontaneous Partial Fracture of the Catheter of a Totally Implantable Subcutaneous Infusion Port
Inoue et al.
JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr 1992;16:75-77.
ABSTRACT
Catheter Fracture and Embolization in a Totally Implanted Venous Access Catheter
Franey et al.
JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr 1988;12:528-530.
ABSTRACT
|
