Skip to main content
Hauptrubriken
CME Facharzt-Training Webinare Zeitschriften Bücher e.Medpedia Podcast
Service
Jobbörse Info & Hilfe
Fachgebiete
Anästhesiologie Allgemeinmedizin Arbeitsmedizin Augenheilkunde Chirurgie Dermatologie Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe HNO Innere Medizin Kardiologie Neurologie Onkologie und Hämatologie Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie Pädiatrie Pathologie Psychiatrie Radiologie Rechtsmedizin Urologie Zahnmedizin
Themen
Klimawandel und Gesundheit Neues aus dem Markt COVID-19 Praxis und Beruf Seltene Erkrankungen GOÄ & EBM Panorama
Sammlungen
Kasuistiken Algorithmen & Infografiken Blickdiagnosen Arthropedia FlapFinder (für Dermatochirurgen) Videos Kongressberichterstattung Medizin für Apothekerinnen und Apotheker Für Ärztinnen und Ärzte in Weiterbildung Für Medizinstudierende

Live-Webinar: Aktuelle Leitlinien bei Herz-Kreislauf-Erkrankungen

Konkret geht es um den Diabetes-Patienten mit kardiovaskulären Erkrankungen oder Risiken, die Herzinsuffizienz sowie die kardiovaskuläre Primär- und Sekundärprävention. Sind Sie hier schon auf dem neuesten Stand? Unsere Experten beleuchten, wo und warum das bisherige Procedere geändert werden soll und was in der Praxis sinnvoll ist. Holen Sie sich Ihr Update und 2 CME-Punkte beim MMW-Webinar am 24. April von 17.30 bis 19 Uhr. 
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
Annals of Surgical Oncology
Erschienen in: Annals of Surgical Oncology 6/2010

01.06.2010 | Medical Oncology

Increased Use of Percutaneous Technique for Totally Implantable Venous Access Devices. Is It Real Progress? A 27-Year Comprehensive Review on Early Complications

verfasst von: Isidoro Di Carlo, MD, PhD, FACS, Elia Pulvirenti, MD, Maurizio Mannino, Adriana Toro, MD

Erschienen in: Annals of Surgical Oncology | Ausgabe 6/2010

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Background

First implantation of a totally implantable venous access device (TIVAD) was performed in 1982 with surgical technique. Since then, these devices have permitted infusion of total parenteral nutrition, antibiotics, blood products, and, above all, they have definitively changed the quality of life of patients with cancer. However, with the increase of percutaneous procedures, we have assisted with a concomitant raise of immediate postprocedural life-threatening complications. The aim of this study was to review the literature during a 27-year period, with regard to the changes of incidence of immediate complications after percutaneous or surgical cutdown for TIVAD’s implant.

Materials and Methods

An extensive search of relevant literature was carried out by using MEDLINE (PubMed) and Google Scholar. We gathered articles from 1982 to 2009 that quoted patient’s number, type of pathology, specialist involved, number of devices implanted, site and technique of implantation (surgical cutdown or percutaneous technique), and immediate complications occurrence.

Results

A total of 952 reports were screened, and finally only 45 articles addressing all inclusion criteria were used for the present study. A total of 11,430 TIVADs implanted in 11,381 patients were analyzed. Pneumothorax, hemothorax, arterial puncture, and hemoptysis developed only after percutaneous procedures. Atrial fibrillation, hematomas, and malpositioning were more frequent after percutaneous approach. The total amount of immediate complications in patients submitted to percutaneous implant was 4.5%, compared with 0.9% subsequent to cutdown technique.

Conclusions

Despite the increased use of percutaneous technique for TIVADs’ implantation, surgical cutdown, because of its safety, remains the best approach to avoid possible fatal immediate complications.
Literatur
1.
Dudrick JJ, Wilmore DW, Vars HM, Rhoads JE. Long-term total parenteral nutrition with growth development and positive nitrose balance. Surgery. 1968;64:134–42.PubMed
2.
Niederhuber JE, Ensminger W, Gyves JW, Liepman M, Doan K, Cozzi E. Totally implanted venous and arterial access system to replace external catheters in cancer treatment. Surgery. 1982;92:706–12.PubMed
3.
Starkhammar H, Bengtsson M. Totally implanted device for venous access. Experience in tumour patients. Acta Radiol Oncol. 1985;24:173–6.CrossRefPubMed
4.
Morris SL, Jaques PF, Mauro MA. Radiology-assisted placement of implantable subcutaneous infusion ports for long-term venous access. Radiology. 1992;184:149–51.PubMed
5.
Laurenzi L, Fimiani C, Faglieri N, Natoli S, Milasi G, Tirelli W, et al. Complications with fully implantable venous access systems in oncologic patients. Tumori. 1996;82:232–6.PubMed
6.
Lorch H, Zwaan M, Kagel C, Weiss HD. Central venous access ports placed by interventional radiologists: experience with 125 consecutive patients. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2001;24:180–4.CrossRefPubMed
7.
Munro FD, Gillett PM, Wratten JC, Shaw MP, Thomas A, MacKinlay GA, et al. Totally implantable central venous access devices for paediatric oncology patients. Med Pediatr Oncol. 1999;33:377–81.CrossRefPubMed
8.
Deogaonkar K, Shokrollahi K, Dickson WA. Haemothorax: a potentially fatal complication of subclavian cannulation—a case report. Resuscitation. 2007;72:161–3.CrossRefPubMed
9.
Lewis CA, Allen TE, Burke DR, Cardella JF, Citron SJ, Cole PE. Quality improvement guidelines for central venous access. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 1997;8:475–9.CrossRefPubMed
10.
Lewis CA, Allen TE, Burke DR, Cardella JF, Citron SJ, Cole PE, et al. Society of Interventional Radiology Standards of Practice Committee. Quality improvement guidelines for central venous access. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2003;14:S231–5.PubMed
11.
Bothe A Jr, Piccione W, Ambrosino JJ, Benotti PN, Lokich JJ. Implantable central venous access system. Am J Surg. 1984;147:565–9.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Champault G. (1985) Completely implantable catheters for anticancer chemotherapy. A French experience of 325 cases. J Chir (Paris). 122:269–72.
13.
Stanislav GV, Fitzgibbons RJ Jr, Bailey RT Jr, Mailliard JA, Johnson PS, Feole JB. Reliability of implantable central venous access devices in patients with cancer. Arch Surg. 1987;122:1280–3.PubMed
14.
Koonings PP, Given FT Jr. Long-term experience with a totally implanted catheter system in gynecologic oncologic patients. J Am Coll Surg. 1994;178:164–6.PubMed
15.
Bertoglio S, Meszsaros P, Disomma C, Moresco L, Cafiero F, Gipponi M, et al. Long-term central venous access in oncology. Review of a caseload of 750 cases. Minerva Chir. 1996;51:427–31.PubMed
16.
Aldrighetti L, Paganelli M, Caterini R, Catena M, Ronzoni M, Ferla G. Safety and efficiency of totally implantable devices for prolonged venous access. A prospective study. J Chemother. 1996;8:393–6.
17.
Ballarini C, Intra M, Pisani Ceretti A, Cordovana A, Prestipino F, Farina G, et al. Le complicanze precoci e tardive dei sistemi venosi impiantabili per chemioterapia a lungo termine nei pazienti oncologici. Osp Ital Chir. 1997;6:517–23.
18.
Miller K, Buchanan GR, Zappa S, Cochran C, Laufenberg J, Medeiros D, et al. Implantable venous access devices in children with hemophilia: a report of low infection rates. J Pediatr. 1998;132:934–8.CrossRefPubMed
19.
Domingo P, Fontanet A, Sánchez F, Allende L, Vazquez G. Morbidity associated with long-term use of totally implantable ports in patients with AIDS. Clin Infect Dis. 1999;29:346–51.CrossRefPubMed
20.
Boussen H, Mtaallah M, Dhiab T, Khalfallah S, Jerbi G, Hechiche M, et al. Evaluation of implantable sites in medical oncology in Tunisia. Prospective study of 205 cases. Ann Fr Anesth Reanim. 2001;20:509–13.PubMed
21.
Lorenz JM, Funaki B, Van Ha T, Leef JA. Radiologic placement of implantable chest ports in pediatric patients. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2001;176:991–4.PubMed
22.
Yip D, Funaki B. Subcutaneous chest ports via the internal jugular vein. A retrospective study of 117 oncology patients. Acta Radiol. 2002;43:371–5.CrossRefPubMed
23.
Carlo JT, Lamont JP, McCarty TM, Livingston S, Kuhn JA. A prospective randomized trial demonstrating valved implantable ports have fewer complications and lower overall cost than nonvalved implantable ports, Am J Surg. 2004;188:722–7.CrossRefPubMed
24.
Biffi R, Pozzi S, Agazzi A, Pace U, Floridi A, Cenciarelli S, et al. 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. Ann Oncol. 2004;15:296–300.CrossRefPubMed
25.
Charvát J, Linke Z, Horáèková M, Prausová J. Implantation of central venous ports with catheter insertion via the right internal jugular vein in oncology patients: single center experience. Support Care Cancer. 2006;14:1162–5.CrossRefPubMed
26.
Cil BE, Canyiğit M, Peynircioğlu B, Hazirolan T, Carkaci S, Cekirge S, et al. Subcutaneous venous port implantation in adult patients: a single center experience. Diagn Interv Radiol. 2006;12:93–8.PubMed
27.
Araújo C, Silva JP, Antunes P, Fernandes JM, Dias C, Pereira H, et al. A comparative study between two central veins for the introduction of totally implantable venous access devices in 1201 cancer patients. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2008;34:222–6.PubMed
28.
Gebauer B, El-Sheik M, Vogt M, Wagner HJ. Combined ultrasound and fluoroscopy guided port catheter implantation—high success and low complication rate. Eur J Radiol. 2009;69:517–22.CrossRefPubMed
29.
Vandoni RE, Guerra A, Sanna P, Bogen M, Cavalli F, Gertsch P. Randomised comparison of complications from three different permanent central venous access systems. Swiss Med Wkly. 2009;139:313–6.PubMed
30.
Bobin JY. Implantable chambers for intravenous cytotoxic chemotherapy. Experience of 9 anticancer centers. Presse Med. 1986;15:911–4.PubMed
31.
Fraioli JP, Schwarzenberg L. Implantable direct intravenous access: technic, complications, outcome. Apropos of 237 cases. J Chir (Paris). 1988;125:638–41.
32.
Harvey WH, Pick TE, Reed K, Solenberger RI. A prospective evaluation of the Port-A-Cath implantable venous access system in chronically ill adults and children. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1989;169:495–500.PubMed
33.
Comandella MG, Rossi M, Finco C, Pittoni G, Pianalto S, Cadamuro MC, et al. The use of totally implantable systems (TIS) for long-term endovenous therapy. G Chir. 1993;14:185–9.PubMed
34.
Tazzioli G, Roncaglia G. Impiego dei sitemi venosi totalmente impiantabili nelle terapie infusive di lunga durata. Chir. 1995;8:93–5.
35.
Di Giorgio A, Bargrazi C, Canavese A, Arnone P, Barberio Corsetti F, et al. Sistemi totalmente impiantabili in oncologia: la vena cefalica come via d’accesso di elezione. Ann Ital Chir. 1997;68:529–37.PubMed
36.
Kariyawasam HH, Pepper JR, Hodson ME, Geddes DM. Experience of totally implantable venous access devices (TIV ADs) in adults with cystic fibrosis over a 13-year period. Respir Med. 2000;94:1161–5.CrossRefPubMed
37.
Stas M, Mulier S, Pattyn P, Vijgen J, De Wever I. Peroperative intravasal electrographic control of catheter tip position in access ports placed by venous cut-down technique. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2001;27:316–20.CrossRefPubMed
38.
Johansson E, Björkholm M, Björvell H, Hast R, Takolander R, Olofsson P, et al. Totally implantable subcutaneous port system versus central venous catheter placed before induction chemotherapy in patients with acute leukaemia—a randomized study. Support Care Cancer. 2004;12:99–105.CrossRefPubMed
39.
Marcy PY, Magné N, Castadot P, Bailet C, Macchiavello JC, Namer M, et al. Radiological and surgical placement of port devices: a 4-year institutional analysis of procedure performance, quality of life and cost in breast cancer patients. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2005;92:61–7.CrossRefPubMed
40.
Di Carlo I, Barbagallo F, Toro A, Sofia M, Lombardo R, Cordio S. External jugular vein cutdown approach, as a useful alternative, supports the choice of the cephalic vein for totally implantable access device placement. Ann Surg Oncol. 2005;12:570–3.CrossRefPubMed
41.
Bruni R, Bartolucci R, Chirco L. I sistemi d’accesso venoso totalmente impiantabili. Chir. 1996;9:146–9.
42.
D’Angelo FA, Ramacciato G, Aurello P, Lauro S, Caramitti A, Lalle M, et al. Alternative insertion sites for permanent central venous access devices. Eur J Surg Oncol. 1997;23:547–9.CrossRefPubMed
43.
Kock HJ, Pietsch M, Krause U, Wilke H, Eigler FW. Implantable vascular access systems: experience in 1500 patients with totally implanted central venous port systems. World J Surg. 1998;22:12–16.CrossRefPubMed
44.
Sarzo G, Finco C, Parise P, Savastano S, Portale G, Vecchiato M, et al. Immediate and long-term complication of prolonged venous access device (PVAD): a comparison between surgical cutdown and percutaneous techniques. Int J Angiol. 2004;13:203–9.CrossRef
45.
Wolosker N, Yazbek G, Nishinari K, Malavolta LC, Minia MA, Langer M, et al. Totally implantable venous catheters for chemotherapy: experience in 500 patients. Sao Paulo Med J. 2004;122:147–51.CrossRefPubMed
46.
Povoski SP. External jugular vein cutdown approach for chronic indwelling central venous access in cancer patients: a potentially useful alternative. World J Surg Oncol. 2004;2:7.CrossRefPubMed
47.
Chang HM, Hsieh CB, Hsieh HF, Chen TW, Chen CJ, Chan DC, Yet al. An alternative technique for totally implantable central venous access devices. A retrospective study of 1311 cases. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2006;32:90–3.CrossRefPubMed
48.
Seiler CM, Frohlich BE, Dorsam UJ, Kienle P, Buchler MW, Knaebel HP. Surgical technique for totally implantable access ports (TIAP) needs improvement: a multivariate analysis of 400 patients. J Surg Oncol. 2006;93:24–9.CrossRefPubMed
49.
Jablon LK, Ugolini KR, Nahmias NC. Cephalic vein cut-down verses percutaneous access: a retrospective study of complications of implantable venous access devices. Am J Surg. 2006;192:63–7.CrossRefPubMed
50.
Chen PT, Sung CS, Wang CC, Chan KH, Chang WK, Hsu WH. Experience of anesthesiologists with percutaneous nonangiographic venous access. J Clin Anesth. 2007;19:609–15.CrossRefPubMed
51.
Broviac JW, Cole JJ, Scribner BH. A silicone rubber atrial catheter for prolonged parenteral alimentation. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1973;136:602–6.PubMed
52.
Hall P, Cedermark B, Swedendorg J. Implantable catheter system for long-term intravenous chemotherapy. J Surg Oncol. 1989;41:39–41.CrossRefPubMed
53.
Grannan KJ, Taylor PH. Early and late complications of totally implantable venous access devices. J Surg Oncol. 1990;44:52–4.CrossRefPubMed
54.
Mansfield PF, Hohn DC, Fornage BD, Gregurich MA, Ota DM. Complications and failures of subclavian-vein catheterization. N Engl J Med. 1994;331:1735–8.CrossRefPubMed
55.
Biffi R, Pozzi S, Cenciarelli S, Zambelli M, Andreoni B. Treatment of pneumothorax as a complication of long-term central venous port placement in oncology patients. An observational study. J Vasc Access. 2001;2:129–36.PubMed
56.
Biffi R, de Braud F, Orsi F, Possi S, Mauri S, Golhirsch A, et al. Totally implantable central venous access ports for long-term chemotherapy. Ann Oncol. 1998;9:767–73.CrossRefPubMed
57.
Nicholson T, Ettles D, Robinson G. Managing inadvertent arterial catheterization during central venous access procedures. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2004;27:21–5.PubMed
58.
Bernard RW, Stahl WM. Subclavian vein catheterizations: a prospective study. I. Non-infectious complications. Ann Surg. 1971;173:184–90.PubMedCrossRef
59.
Povoski SP. A prospective analysis of the cephalic vein cutdown approach for chronic indwelling central venous access in 100 consecutive cancer patients. Ann Surg Oncol. 2000;7:496–502.CrossRefPubMed
60.
Brothers TE, Von Moll LK, Niederhuber JE, Roberts JA, Walker-Andrews S, Ensminger WD. Experience with subcutaneous infusion ports in three hundred patients. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1988;166:295–301.PubMed
Metadaten
Titel
Increased Use of Percutaneous Technique for Totally Implantable Venous Access Devices. Is It Real Progress? A 27-Year Comprehensive Review on Early Complications
verfasst von
Isidoro Di Carlo, MD, PhD, FACS
Elia Pulvirenti, MD
Maurizio Mannino
Adriana Toro, MD
Publikationsdatum
01.06.2010
Verlag
Springer-Verlag
Erschienen in
Annals of Surgical Oncology / Ausgabe 6/2010
Print ISSN: 1068-9265
Elektronische ISSN: 1534-4681
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-010-1005-4

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 6/2010

Annals of Surgical Oncology 6/2010 Zur Ausgabe

Translational Research and Biomarkers

Chromosomal Alterations in Pure Nonneoplastic Breast Lesions: Implications for Breast Cancer Progression

Gynecologic Oncology

Influence of Residual Tumor on Outcome in Ovarian Cancer Patients With FIGO Stage IV Disease

Translational Research and Biomarkers

Glucose-Regulated Protein 78 (GRP78) Silencing Enhances Cell Migration but Does Not Influence Cell Proliferation in Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Endocrine Tumors

Prophylactic Lymphadenectomy of Neck Level II in Clinically Node-Positive Papillary Thyroid Carcinoma

Colorectal Cancer

Body Mass Index does not Affect Postoperative Morbidity and Oncologic Outcomes of Total Mesorectal Excision for Rectal Adenocarcinoma

Gastrointestinal Oncology

Laparoscopic Total Gastrectomy and D2 Lymphadenectomy

Neu im Fachgebiet Chirurgie

17.04.2024 | Postoperative nausea and vomiting | Nachrichten

Hochrisiko-Eingriffe für postoperative Übelkeit

16.04.2024 | HNO-Chirurgie | Nachrichten

HNO-Op. auch mit über 90?

16.04.2024 | Infektiologie | Nachrichten

Kein Abstrich bei chronischen Wunden ohne Entzündungszeichen!

10.04.2024 | Postoperative Schmerztherapie | Nachrichten

Chronische Schmerzen nach Op. oft mit neuropathischer Komponente
weitere anzeigen

Update Chirurgie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

Newsletter bestellen

Aktuelle BDC Leitlinien-Webinare

S3-Leitlinie „Diagnostik und Therapie des Karpaltunnelsyndroms“

Karpaltunnelsyndrom CME-Kurs
CME: 2 Punkte

Prof. Dr. med. Gregor Antoniadis Das Karpaltunnelsyndrom ist die häufigste Kompressionsneuropathie peripherer Nerven. Obwohl die Anamnese mit dem nächtlichen Einschlafen der Hand (Brachialgia parästhetica nocturna) sehr typisch ist, ist eine klinisch-neurologische Untersuchung und Elektroneurografie in manchen Fällen auch eine Neurosonografie erforderlich. Im Anfangsstadium sind konservative Maßnahmen (Handgelenksschiene, Ergotherapie) empfehlenswert. Bei nicht Ansprechen der konservativen Therapie oder Auftreten von neurologischen Ausfällen ist eine Dekompression des N. medianus am Karpaltunnel indiziert.

Prof. Dr. med. Gregor Antoniadis
Berufsverband der Deutschen Chirurgie e.V.

S2e-Leitlinie „Distale Radiusfraktur“

Radiusfraktur CME-Kurs
CME: 2 Punkte

Dr. med. Benjamin Meyknecht, PD Dr. med. Oliver Pieske Das Webinar S2e-Leitlinie „Distale Radiusfraktur“ beschäftigt sich mit Fragen und Antworten zu Diagnostik und Klassifikation sowie Möglichkeiten des Ausschlusses von Zusatzverletzungen. Die Referenten erläutern, welche Frakturen konservativ behandelt werden können und wie. Das Webinar beantwortet die Frage nach aktuellen operativen Therapiekonzepten: Welcher Zugang, welches Osteosynthesematerial? Auf was muss bei der Nachbehandlung der distalen Radiusfraktur geachtet werden?

PD Dr. med. Oliver Pieske
Dr. med. Benjamin Meyknecht
Berufsverband der Deutschen Chirurgie e.V.

S1-Leitlinie „Empfehlungen zur Therapie der akuten Appendizitis bei Erwachsenen“

Appendizitis CME-Kurs
CME: 2 Punkte

Dr. med. Mihailo Andric
Inhalte des Webinars zur S1-Leitlinie „Empfehlungen zur Therapie der akuten Appendizitis bei Erwachsenen“ sind die Darstellung des Projektes und des Erstellungswegs zur S1-Leitlinie, die Erläuterung der klinischen Relevanz der Klassifikation EAES 2015, die wissenschaftliche Begründung der wichtigsten Empfehlungen und die Darstellung stadiengerechter Therapieoptionen.

Dr. med. Mihailo Andric
Berufsverband der Deutschen Chirurgie e.V.