Early and late complications after implantation of venous port-systems for long-term infusion therapy

DOI: https://doi.org/10.25512/DIR.2017.11.3.07

For quoting:
Belyakov G.A., Vodyanov I.S., Livshits M.V. "Early and late complications after implantation of venous port-systems for long-term infusion therapy". Journal Diagnostic & interventional radiology. 2017; 11(3); 59-68.

authors:

Belyakov G.A.

Vodyanov I.S.

Livshits M.V.

keywords:

implantation of venous port-systems

early and late post-operative complications

pneumothorax

Pressure sores

infection of post-system chamber

pinch-off syndrome

Abstract:

Aim: was to decrease rate of early and late complications after implantaion of venous post-system for long-term infusion therapy in patients with adverse vascular access by estimations of complications and prophylaxis.

Materials and methods: research group included 25 patients with early and late postoperative complications, from data of retrospective analysis of 1690 cancer patients with implanted venous port-system. 15 port-systems (0,9%) were removed because of infection. Pressure sores in the soft tissues because of thinned subcutaneous fatty tissue or incorrect selection of the port-system model were revealed in 3 patients (0,17%), catheter migration to the right atrium or a. pulmonalis (pinch-off syndrome) was observed in 3 cases(0,17%),, 4 patients (0,23%) developed early complications in the form of pneumothorax.

Conclusions: importance of aseptic and antiseptic rules while performing puncture of the port chamber, methods for implantation of venous port systems - should decrease rate of early and late post-operative complications in patients with adverse vascular access.

References

1. Jugrinov O.G. Polnostju implantiruemye infuzionnye sistemy central'nogo venoznogo dostupa (porty) [Full-implanted infusion systems in central veins]. Klinicheskaja onkologija. 2011; 2(2): 18-22 {In Russ].

2. Marcy P.Y, Magne N., Castadot Р. 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; 92:61-67.

3. Gebauer B., El-Sheik M., Vogt M. et al. Combined ultrasound and fluoroscopy guided port catheter implantation-high success and low complication rate. Eur Radiol. 2009; 69:517-522.

4. Cil B.E., Canyigit M., Peynircioglu В. et al. Subcutaneous venous port implantation in adult patients: a single center experience. Diagn Interv Radiol. 2006; 12: 93-98.

5. Orsi F., Grasso R.F., Arnaldi P. et al. Ultrasound guided versus direct vein puncture in central venous port placement. Vase Access 2000; 1:73-77.

6. Dede D., Akmangit I., Yildirim Z.N., Sanverdi E., Sayin B. Ultrasonography and fluoroscopy-guided insertion of chest ports. Eur. Surg Oncol. 2008; 34:1340-1343.

7. Ignatov A., Hoffman O., Smith В. et al. An 11 -year retrospective study of totally implanted central venous access ports: complications and patient satisfaction. Eur.Surg Oncol. 2009; 35:241-246.

8. Fischer L., Knebel P., Schroder Set al. Reasons for explantation of totally implantable access ports: a multivariate analysis of 385 consecutive patients. Ann Surg Oncol. 2008,15:1124-1129.

9. Evangelos Perdikakis, Elias Kakhegis, Dimitrios Tsetis. Obshie i spetsificheskie oslozhnenia, voznikaushie pri ispolzovanii polnost’u implantiruemikh tsentralnikh venoznikh portov dostupa. [General and specific complications, occuring during implantation of cental venous port-systemts] J. Vasc Access 2012;13 (3): 345-350 DOI: 10.5301/jva.5000055

10. Iее I.H., Kim YB., Lee M.K. et al. Catastrophic hemothorax on the contralateral side of the insertion of an implantable subclavian venous access device and the ipsilateral side of the removal of the infected port A case report. Korean Anesthesiol. 2010; 59:214-219.

9. Teichgra ber U.K., Gebauer B., Benter T. et al. Longterm central venous lines and their complications. Roto 2004; 176:944-992.

10. Ener R.A., Meglahtery S.B., Styler M. Extravasation of systemic emato-oncological therapies. Ann Oncol. 2004:15:858-862.

11. Kreis H., Loehberg C.R., Lux M.P. et al. Patients' attitudes to totally implantable venous access port systems for gynecological or breast malignancies. Eur. Surg Oncol. 2007; 33:39-43.

12. Yildizeli B., Lacin T., Batirel H.F. et al. Complications and management of long-term central venous access catheters and ports.) Vase Access 2004; 5:174-178.

13. Zhang 0., Liao L., Zhou H. Comparison of implantable central venous ports with catheter insertion via external jugular с ut down and subclavian puncture in children: single center experience. Pediatr Surg Int. 2009; 25: 499-501.

14. Paoletti F., Ripani U., Antonelli M., Nicoletta С. Central venous catheters. Observations on the implantation technique and its complications. Minerva Anestesiol. 2005; 71: 555-560.

15. Lorch H., Zwaan M., Kagel С. et al. Central venous access ports placed by interventional radiologists: experience with 125 consecutive patie