Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on sleep in brain health

LIVE: Thursday 2nd May 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)

Quality sleep is essential for health. But what happens to our brains when sleep patterns are disturbed? Join our experts to explore the interplay between sleep disruption and neurological diseases, and the questions that you need to be asking your patients to help you prevent the harmful effects of sleep deprivation.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
World Journal of Surgery
Published in: World Journal of Surgery 9/2019

Open Access 01-09-2019 | Breast Cancer | Original Scientific Report

Which is Better for Patients with Breast Cancer: Totally Implanted Vascular Access Devices (TIVAD) or Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter (PICC)?

Authors: Tian-tian Tang, Lei Liu, Chun-xiao Li, Yun-tao Li, Tao Zhou, Hai-ping Li, Jianxin Wang

Published in: World Journal of Surgery | Issue 9/2019

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Our aim was to compare the applications of totally implanted vascular access devices (TIVAD) and peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) in breast cancer patients.

Methods

We analyzed 4080 cases of TIVAD and 1433 cases of PICC at the Breast Center of the Fourth Hospital of Hebei Medical University. The success rate, operation time, and procedures of catheterization, as well as the catheterization-related complications, catheter indwelling-related complications, and the utilization conditions were compared between these two methods.

Results

Our results showed that the success rate of catheterization was relatively higher in PICC group (99.5%) than the TIVAD group (99.0%)(χ2 = 3.521, P = 0.038), and the operation time and the rate of catheterization-related complications were lower in PICC (18.65 ± 4.7603 min, 0.91%) compared to TIVAD (29.55 ± 4.0843 min, 1.59%)(t = 38.000, P < 0.01, χ2 = 3.578, P = 0.035). However, the rate of catheter indwelling-related complications was lower in TIVAD group (2.47%) than the PICC group (3.62%)(χ2 = 5.227, P = 0.016), and the catheter care was also better in TIVAD.

Conclusions

Based on these analyses, we recommended TIVAD for the patients who need long-term and high-dose chemotherapy and PICC for the patients who need short chemotherapy cycle and live close to the hospital.
Literature
1.
2.
Broviac JW, Cole JJ, Scribner BH (1973) A silicone rubber atrial catheter for prolonged parenteral alimentation. Surg Gynecol Obstet 136(4):602–606PubMed
3.
Johansson E, Hammarskjöld F, Lundberg D et al (2013) Advantages and disadvantages of peripherally inserted central venous catheters (PICC) compared to other central venous lines: a systematic review of the literature. Acta Oncol 52:886–892CrossRefPubMed
4.
Harter C, Ostendorf T, Bach A et al (2003) Peripherally inserted central catheter for autologous blood progenitor cell transplantation in patients with haema to logical malignancies. Support Care Cancer 11(12):790–794CrossRefPubMed
5.
Worth LJ, Seymour JF, Slavin MA (2009) Infective and thrombotic complications of central venous catheters in patients with hematological malignancy: prospective evaluation of nontunneled devices. Support Care Cancer 17:811–818CrossRefPubMed
6.
Groeger JS, Lucas AB, Thaler HT et al (1993) Infectious morbidity associated with long-term use of venous access devices in patients with cancer. Ann Intern Med 119:1168–1174CrossRefPubMed
7.
Patel GS, Jain K, Kumar R et al (2014) Comparison of peripherally inserted central venous catheters (PICC) versus subcutaneously implanted port-chamber catheters by complication and cost for patients receiving chemotherapy for non-haematological malignancies. Support Care Cancer 22(1):121–128CrossRefPubMed
8.
Liberale G, El Houkayem M, Viste C et al (2016) Evaluation of the perceptions and cosmetic satisfaction of breast cancer patients undergoing totally implantable vascular access device (TIVAD) placement. Support Care Cancer 24(12):5035–5040CrossRefPubMed
9.
Gallieni M, Pittiruti M, Biffi R (2008) Vascular access in oncology patients. CA Cancer J Clin 58:323–346CrossRefPubMed
10.
Sakamoto E, Hasegawa H, Komatsu S et al (2013) Complications after implantation of subcutaneous central venous port. Gan To Kagaku Ryoho 40:613–616PubMed
11.
Ignatov A, Hoffman O, Smith B et al (2009) An 11-year retrospective study of totally implanted central venous access ports: complications and patient satisfaction. Eur J Surg Oncol 35:241–246CrossRefPubMed
12.
Sawayama H, Hayashi N, Watanabe M et al (2012) The central vein access port and catheter in outpatient chemotherapy for colorectal cancer: a retrospective study of 101 patients. Surg Today 42:29–34CrossRefPubMed
13.
Sideris LLY, Barette G, et al. (2001) Long term central venous access for chemotherapy. PICC line by the radiologist or broviac by the surgeon? Eur J Cancer 37: absract 1325
14.
Last KMJ, Oakley C, Lofts F (1998) Long-term intravenous access devices: superiority of peripherally inserted central cannulae (PICC) over hickman catheters (HC). Ann Oncol 9:142
15.
Yap YS, Karapetis C, Lerose S et al (2006) Reducing the risk of peripherally inserted central catheter line complications in the oncology setting. Eur J Cancer Care (Engl) 15:342–347CrossRef
16.
Walshe LJ, Malak SF, Eagan J et al (2002) Complication rates among cancer patients with peripherally inserted central catheters. J Clin Oncol 20:3276–3281CrossRefPubMed
17.
Seckold T, Walker S, Dwyer T (2015) A comparison of silicone and polyurethane PICC lines and postinsertion complication rates: a systematic review. J Vasc Access 16(3):167–177CrossRefPubMed
18.
Tang Tian-Tian, Li Yun-Tao, Zhang Li-Na et al (2016) Handling measures for the implantable vascular access device to prevent of catheter fracture/disruption. Int J Clin Exp Med 9(2):3191–3196
19.
Bertani L, Carone M, Caricati L et al (2016) Using the theory of planned behavior to explore hospital-based nurses’ intention to use peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC): a survey study. Acta Biomed 87(4-s):23–29PubMed
20.
Jie Chen, Hui Zhao, Zhijie Xia et al (2018) Knowledge, attitude, and practice toward the daily management of PICC in critically ill cancer patients discharged from intensive care units. Cancer Manag Res 10:1565–1574CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Which is Better for Patients with Breast Cancer: Totally Implanted Vascular Access Devices (TIVAD) or Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter (PICC)?
Authors
Tian-tian Tang
Lei Liu
Chun-xiao Li
Yun-tao Li
Tao Zhou
Hai-ping Li
Jianxin Wang
Publication date
01-09-2019
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Published in
World Journal of Surgery / Issue 9/2019
Print ISSN: 0364-2313
Electronic ISSN: 1432-2323
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-019-05022-x

Other articles of this Issue 9/2019

World Journal of Surgery 9/2019 Go to the issue

Surgery in Low and Middle Income Countries

Analysis of Surgical Adverse Events at a Major University Hospital in South Africa

Original Scientific Report

Association Between Gender, Surgery and Mortality for Patients Treated at Médecins Sans Frontières Trauma Centre in Kunduz, Afghanistan

Original Scientific Report

Has Symptom-Based Admission Replaced Diagnosis in the Emergency Department? An 18-Year Review of Emergency General Surgical Admissions at Royal Perth Hospital

Original Scientific Report

Peritoneal Flap Hernioplasty for Reconstruction of Large Ventral Hernias: Long-Term Outcome in 251 Patients

Original Scientific Report

Seasonal, Weather, and Temporal Factors in the Prediction of Admission to a Pediatric Trauma Center

Original Scientific Report

Predictors for Pediatric Blunt Cerebrovascular Injury (BCVI): An International Multicenter Analysis