Application and comparison of different implanted ports in malignant tumor patients. Issue 1 (December 2016)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Li, Yanhong; Cai, Yonghua; Gan, Xiaoqin; Ye, Xinmei; Ling, Jiayu; Kang, Liang; Ye, Junwen; Zhang, Xingwei; Zhang, Jianwei; Cai, Yue; Hu, Huabin; Huang, Meijin; Deng, Yanhong
• Is Part Of: World journal of surgical oncology. Volume 14:Issue 1(2016)
• Page Start: 1
• Page End: 6
• Publication Date: 2016-12
• Subjects: Vein port -- Complication -- Upper arm vein -- Jugular vein -- Subclavian vein; Cancer -- Surgery -- Periodicals; Tumors -- Periodicals; Tumors -- Surgery -- Periodicals; Surgery, Operative -- Periodicals; 616.994059
• DOI: 10.1186/s12957-016-1002-6
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1477-7819

Abstract

Abstract Background The current study aims to compare the application and convenience of the upper arm port with the other two methods of implanted ports in the jugular vein and the subclavian vein in patients with gastrointestinal cancers. Methods Currently, the standard of practice is placement of central venous access via an internal jugular vein approach. Perioperative time, postoperative complications, and postoperative comfort level in patients receiving an implanted venous port in the upper arm were retrospectively compared to those in the jugular vein and the subclavian vein from April 2013 to November 2014. Results Three hundred thirty-four patients are recruited for this analysis, consisting of 107 in the upper arm vein group, 70 in the jugular vein group, and 167 in the subclavian vein group. The occurrence of catheter misplacement in the upper arm vein is higher than that in the other two groups (13.1 vs. 2.9 vs. 5.4 %, respectively, P = 0.02), while the other complications in the perioperative period were not significantly different. The occurrence of transfusion obstacle of the upper arm vein group is significantly lower than that of the jugular and subclavian groups (0.9 vs. 7.1 vs. 7.2 %, P = 0.01). The occurrence of thrombus is also lower than that of other two groups (0.9 vs. 4.3 vs. 3.6 %, P = 0.03). Regarding the postoperative comfort, the influences of appearance (0 vs. 7.1 vs. 2.9 %, P = 0.006) and sleep (0.9 vs. 4.2 vs. 10.7 %, P = 0.003) are significantly better than those of the jugular and subclavian vein groups. Conclusions Compared to the jugular and the subclavian vein groups, the implanted venous port in the upper arm vein has fewer complications and more convenience and comfort, and might be a superior novel choice for patients requiring long-term chemotherapy or parenteral nutrition.