Search

Introduction: The catheter is the only intravascular portion of an implanted port and plays a crucial role in catheter related complications. Both polyurethane and silicone are biocompatible materials which are utilized for catheter manufacturing, but their correlation to complications remains controversial. The aim of this study was to try to analyze the relationship between catheter materials and complications., Materials and Methods: A total of 3144 patients who underwent intravenous port implantation between March 2012 and December 2018 at Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Linkou, Taiwan were recruited. Of these, 1226 patients received silicone catheter port implantation and 1679 received polyurethane catheter ports. Case matching was done prior to analysis and catheter related complications and cumulative complication incidence for each group were compared., Results: Intergroup differences were identified in entry vessel (p = 0.0441), operation year (p < 0.0001), operation method (p = 0.0095), functional period (p < 0.0001), patient follow up status (p < 0.0001), operating time for vessel cutdown (p < 0.0001) and wire assisted approach (p = 0.0008). Stratified by specific entry vessel, no statistical difference was found in complication rate or incidence between the silicone and polyurethane groups. We further compared the cumulative complication incidence of the silicone and polyurethane groups, and also found no statistical difference (p = 0.4451)., Conclusion: As long as external stress forces generated by surrounding structures and focused on potential weak points are avoided, both silicone and polyurethane materials provide sufficient structural stability to serve as reliable vascular access for patients., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Background: Adequate tip location is crucial for intravenous port implantation because it can minimize catheter-related complications. Adequate tip location cannot be observed directly and needs to be confirmed by imaging tools. A quantified intravascular catheter length formula has been proposed and we attempt to compare its clinical effectiveness with anatomic landmark references., Methods: During the period from March 2012 to February 2013, 503 patients who received port implantation where implanted catheter length depended on carina level as confirmed by intraoperative fluoroscopy were assigned to Group A. From March 2013 to February 2014, 521 patients who received port implantation based on quantified intravascular catheter length formula were assigned to Group B. Clinical outcomes were compared., Results: Catheter tip location of Group A, as revealed by intraoperative fluoroscopy and postoperative chest film, was 1.18 ± 0.51 and 1.1 ± 1.3 cm below carina, respectively. Catheter tip location of Group B, as revealed by intraoperative fluoroscopy and postoperative chest film, was 1.25 ± 1.05 and 1.05 ± 1.32 cm below carina, respectively. Similar catheter tip location was identified in both groups. The functional period of implanted ports, complication rate (3.58% and 2.53%), and incidence (0.049 and 0.0506 episodes/1,000 catheter days) were similar in both groups., Conclusions: The quantified intravascular catheter length formula can predict an adequate catheter length just as well as carina do and results in good catheter tip location. The formula could replace the clinical use of anatomic landmarks and serve as an easy tool for practitioners., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Adequate catheter tip location is crucial for functional intravenous port and central venous catheter. Numerous complications were reported because of catheter migration that caused by inadequate tip location. Different guidelines recommend different ideal locations without consensus. Another debate is actual movement of intravascular portion of implanted catheter. From literature review, the catheter migrated peripherally an average of 20 mm on the erect chest radiographs. In this study, we want to verify the actual presentation of catheter movement within a vessel and try to find a quantitative catheter length model to recommend.From March 2012 to March 2013, 346 patients were included into this prospective cohort study. We collect clinical data from medical record and utilized picture archiving and communication system to measure all image parameters. Statistical analysis was utilized to identify the risk factors for catheter migration.The nonmigration group had 221 patients (63.9%); 67 (19.4%) patients were classified into the peripheral migration group; and 58 (16.8%) patients were classified into the central migration group. Patients with short height (P = 0.03), larger superior vena cava (SVC) diameters at the brachiocephalic vein confluence site (P = 0.02), and longer implanted catheter length (P = 0.0004) had greater risks for central migration. We utilized regression curve for further analysis and height (centimeters)/10 had moderate correlation distances from the entry vessel to the carina.Although intravascular movement of catheter was exist in implanted catheter, the intraoperative fluoroscopy could provide accurate catheter tip location in 63.9% patients. Additional length of catheter implantation seems unnecessary in 80.6% patients. Patients with short height, larger SVC diameters at the brachiocephalic vein confluence site had greater risk for catheter central movement. Height/10 may be consider as reference length of implantation for inexperience surgeon and precise implantation length could be adjust under guidance of fluoroscopy., Competing Interests: The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose.

Purposes: The optimal tip position for an intravenous port and the angle between the locking nut and the catheter are still debatable. This study evaluates the use of chest X-ray plain films for screening patients with potential intravenous port complications., Methods: We reviewed, retrospectively, 1505 patients who had an intravenous port implanted between January 1 and December 31, 2006 at Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, and were followed up until June 30, 2010. Of the 1119 patients with an intravenous port implanted via the superior vena cava (SVC), 279 underwent re-interventions for complications. There were four different types of single lumen port, and entry vessels on the right side were utilized as the predominant entry sites through the vessel cut-down method for catheter cannulation. The anatomic catheter tip was confirmed on the postero-anterior view of plain chest X-ray films. We used the Picture Arching and Communicating System (PACS) (GE, Fairfield, CT, USA) to record the angle and distance in degrees and centimeters, respectively., Results: The tracheal carina was seen easily on the chest X-ray plain film and the location of the catheter tip and the angle between the locking nut and the catheter were identified. The location of the catheter tip was significantly related to migration (p < 0.0001). The cut-off value of the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve for location and migration was 0.68 cm below the carina. The area under the curve (AUC) was 0.8385 and had favorable predictive power., Conclusion: The ideal position of an intravenous port to avoid migration is 0.68 cm below the carina. For surgeons, a quantified reference may minimize technical errors. Patients with shallow tip location should be followed up regularly and aggressive intervention initiated for any intravenous port malfunction.

Objective: To identify the risk factors leading to catheter malfunction., Background: Reliable venous access is crucial for cancer patients. Malfunction of intravenous ports may lead to discontinuation of treatment and repeated interventions. We retrospectively reviewed the independent risk factors for catheter malfunction among patients receiving intravenous port implantations., Methods: A total of 1508 procedures were included from the calendar year 2006, and clinical data and chest plain films were analyzed. The patients were followed-up until June 30, 2010. For patients still alive, the last outpatient follow-up date was considered as the end point. For the remaining patients, the date of death or discharge against advice was considered as the end points. The risk factors for catheter malfunction were then evaluated., Results: The intervention-free periods of the malfunction group and nonmalfunction group were 317 and 413 days, respectively. Statistical analyses showed that the Nut-Catheter Angle was the only risk factor for catheter malfunction (P = 0.001). A logistic model also confirmed that the Nut-Catheter Angle was the only risk factor for catheter malfunction (P < 0.001). Valve tip catheters were not advantageous with regard to catheter malfunction prevention as compared to open tip catheters., Conclusions: A smaller Nut-Catheter Angle had a greater risk for catheter malfunction. Catheter impingement caused by inadequate pocket creation and port implantation lead to compromised catheter lumen and difficulty flushing. The possibility of retained blood and medications increased thin thrombotic biofilm formation and medication precipitation. Catheter malfunctions can be avoided by using proper surgical techniques and adequate maintenance.