Alternate Cervical Venous Access Sites for Implantable Port Catheters: Experience at a Single Quaternary Care Institution

植入式输液港导管的替代颈静脉入路部位:一家四级医疗机构的经验

阅读:1

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Clinical outcomes of implantable port catheters (IPCs) placed via alternative veins such as the external jugular and cervical collaterals have not been well established. This investigation evaluates the short- and long-term outcomes of IPCs inserted via alternate cervical veins (ACV) compared to traditionally inserted IPCs via the internal jugular vein (IJV). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 24 patients who received an IPC between 2010 and 2020 via an ACV-defined as the external jugular vein, superficial cervical vein, or unnamed collateral veins-were identified. Based on power analysis, a matched control group of 72 patients who received IPCs via the IJV was identified. Non-inferiority analysis for port complications was performed between the two groups based on the selected non-inferiority margin of 20%. Secondary end points included complication-free survival and comparison of complications by the time at which they occurred. RESULTS: ACV access was non-inferior to traditional access for overall complications. Alternate access resulted in fewer complications than traditional access with an estimated reduction of - 7.0% [95% CI - 23.6%, 39.7%]. There was no significant difference in peri-procedural and post-procedural complications between the two groups. Complication-free survival was also equivalent between the two groups. CONCLUSION: IPC placement via ACVs was non-inferior to IPCs placed via traditional access through the IJV. When abnormal pathology obviates the use of IJV access, other cervical veins may be considered prior to seeking alternate locations such as femoral, translumbar, inferior vena cava, and hepatic veins.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。