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
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
European Radiology
Published in: European Radiology 6/2011

01-06-2011 | Interventional

Outcome analysis in 3,160 implantations of radiologically guided placements of totally implantable central venous port systems

Authors: Ulf K. M. Teichgräber, Stephan Kausche, Sebastian N. Nagel, Bernhard Gebauer

Published in: European Radiology | Issue 6/2011

Login to get access

Abstract

Objectives

In this retrospective study the success and complication rates after radiologically guided port catheter implantation were evaluated.

Methods

Between 2000 and 2008, 3,160 port catheter systems were implanted in our interventional suite. All interventions were imaging guided. The puncture of the preferably right internal jugular vein (IJV) was ultrasound-assisted and the catheter tip position was controlled with fluoroscopy. Catheter indwelling time and rates of periprocedural, early and late complications were evaluated.

Results

922,599 catheter days (mean, 292 days; range, 0–2,704 days) were documented. The implantation was successful in 3,153 (99.8%) cases. A total of 374 (11.8%; 0.41/1,000 catheter days) adverse events were recorded. Of these, 42 (1.33%) were periprocedural complications. 86 (3.3%; 0.09/1,000 catheter days) early and 246 (9.4%; 0.27/1,000 catheter days) late onset complications occurred after port implantation. The most common complications were blood stream infection (n = 134; 5.1%; 0.15/1,000 catheter days), catheter-induced venous thrombosis (n = 97; 3.7%; 0.11/1,000 catheter days) and catheter migration (n = 34; 1.3%; 0.04/1,000 catheter days). A total of 193 (6.1%) port explantations were required.

Conclusion

Ultrasound guided port implantation via the IJV results in low periprocedural complication rates
Literature
1.
Silberzweig JE, Sacks D, Khorsandi AS, Bakal CW (2000) Reporting standards for central venous access. Technology Assessment Committee. J Vasc Interv Radiol 11:391–400PubMedCrossRef
2.
Niederhuber JE, Ensminger W, Gyves JW, Liepman M, Doan K, Cozzi E (1982) Totally implanted venous and arterial access system to replace external catheters in cancer treatment. Surgery 92:706–712PubMed
3.
Kock HJ, Pietsch M, Krause U, Wilke H, Eigler FW (1998) Implantable vascular access systems: experience in 1500 patients with totally implanted central venous port systems. World J Surg 22:12–16PubMedCrossRef
4.
Yeste Sanchez L, Galbis Caravajal JM, Fuster Diana CA, Moledo Eiras E (2006) Protocol for the implantation of a venous access device (Port-A-Cath System). The complications and solutions found in 560 cases. Clin Transl Oncol 8:735–741PubMedCrossRef
5.
Biffi R, de Braud F, Orsi F et al (1998) Totally implantable central venous access ports for long-term chemotherapy. A prospective study analyzing complications and costs of 333 devices with a minimum follow-up of 180 days. Ann Oncol 9:767–773PubMedCrossRef
6.
Lyon RD, Griggs KA, Johnson AM, Olsen JR (1999) Long-term follow-up of upper extremity implanted venous access devices in oncology patients. J Vasc Interv Radiol 10:463–471PubMedCrossRef
7.
Teichgraber UK, Gebauer B, Benter T, Wagner J (2004) Long-term central venous lines and their complications. Rofo 176:944–952PubMed
8.
Mueller BU, Skelton J, Callender DP et al (1992) A prospective randomized trial comparing the infectious and noninfectious complications of an externalized catheter versus a subcutaneously implanted device in cancer patients. J Clin Oncol 10:1943–1948PubMed
9.
Pegues D, Axelrod P, McClarren C et al (1992) Comparison of infections in Hickman and implanted port catheters in adult solid tumor patients. J Surg Oncol 49:156–162PubMedCrossRef
10.
Ng F, Mastoroudes H, Paul E et al (2007) A comparison of Hickman line- and Port-a-Cath-associated complications in patients with solid tumours undergoing chemotherapy. Clin Oncol 19:551–556CrossRef
11.
Di Carlo I, Cordio S, La Greca G et al (2001) Totally implantable venous access devices implanted surgically: a retrospective study on early and late complications. Arch Surg 136:1050–1053PubMedCrossRef
12.
Reeves AR, Seshadri R, Trerotola SO (2001) Recent trends in central venous catheter placement: a comparison of interventional radiology with other specialties. J Vasc Interv Radiol 12:1211–1214PubMedCrossRef
13.
Adamus R, Beyer-Enke S, Otte P, Loose R (2002) Ultrasound-guided puncture of the subclavian vein to implant central venous ports. Rofo 174:1450–1453PubMed
14.
Povoski SP (2000) A prospective analysis of the cephalic vein cutdown approach for chronic indwelling central venous access in 100 consecutive cancer patients. Ann Surg Oncol 7:496–502PubMedCrossRef
15.
Araujo C, Silva JP, Antunes P et al (2008) A comparative study between two central veins for the introduction of totally implantable venous access devices in 1201 cancer patients. Ejso 34:222–226PubMed
16.
Randolph AG, Cook DJ, Gonzales CA, Pribble CG (1996) Ultrasound guidance for placement of central venous catheters: a meta-analysis of the literature. Crit Care Med 24:2053–2058PubMedCrossRef
17.
Funaki B (2002) Central venous access: a primer for the diagnostic radiologist. AJR Am J Roentgenol 179:309–318PubMed
18.
Wagner HJ, Teichgraber U, Gebauer B, Kalinowski M (2003) Transjugular implantation of venous port catheter systems. Rofo 175:1539–1544PubMed
19.
Teichgraber UK, Benter T, Gebel M, Manns MP (1997) A sonographically guided technique for central venous access. AJR Am J Roentgenol 169:731–733PubMed
20.
Teichgraber UK, Benter T, Schultz HJ, Kluhs L, Gutberlet M, Felix R (2000) Ultrasonographically guided puncture technique for central venous vessels as a one-person technique. Ultraschall Med 21:132–136PubMedCrossRef
21.
Lorch H, Zwaan M, Kagel C, Weiss HD (2001) Central venous access ports placed by interventional radiologists: experience with 125 consecutive patients. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 24:180–184PubMedCrossRef
22.
Lorenz JM, Funaki B, Van Ha T, Leef JA (2001) Radiologic placement of implantable chest ports in pediatric patients. AJR Am J Roentgenol 176:991–994PubMed
23.
Pittiruti M, Malerba M, Carriero C, Tazza L, Gui D (2000) Which is the easiest and safest technique for central venous access? A retrospective survey of more than 5, 400 cases. J Vasc Access 1:100–107PubMed
24.
Gebauer B, El-Sheik M, Vogt M, Wagner HJ (2009) Combined ultrasound and fluoroscopy guided port catheter implantation–high success and low complication rate. Eur J Radiol 69:517–522PubMedCrossRef
25.
Albo Lopez C, Lopez Rodriguez D, Constenla Camba MI, Jimenez Blanco A, Araujo LF, Garcia-Medina J (1999) Infectious and non-infectious complications of tunneled central catheters in hematologic patients. Sangre 44:176–181PubMed
26.
Lim SH, Smith MP, Machin SJ, Goldstone AH (1993) A prospective randomized study of prophylactic teicoplanin to prevent early Hickman catheter-related sepsis in patients receiving intensive chemotherapy for haematological malignancies. Eur J Haematol Suppl 54:10–13PubMed
27.
Graninger W, Assadian O, Lagler H, Ramharter M (2002) The role of glycopeptides in the treatment of intravascular catheter-related infections. Clin Microbiol Infect 8:310–315PubMedCrossRef
28.
Seldinger SI (1953) Catheter replacement of the needle in percutaneous arteriography; a new technique. Acta Radiol 39:368–376PubMedCrossRef
29.
O’Grady NP, Alexander M, Dellinger EP et al (2002) Guidelines for the prevention of intravascular catheter-related infections. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. MMWR Recomm Rep 51(RR-10):1–29PubMed
30.
Gebauer B BA, Wagner H-J (2008) Zentralvenöse Katheter: Diagnostik von Komplikationen und therapeutische Optionen [Central venous catheters: detection of catheter complications and therapeutical options.] Radiologie up2date 8:135–154
31.
Teichgraber UK, Gebauer B, Benter T, Wagner HJ (2003) Central venous access catheters: radiological management of complications. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 26:321–333PubMedCrossRef
32.
Yip D, Funaki B (2002) Subcutaneous chest ports via the internal jugular vein. A retrospective study of 117 oncology patients. Acta Radiol 43:371–375PubMedCrossRef
33.
Sticca RP, Dewing BD, Harris JD (2009) Outcomes of surgical and radiologic placed implantable central venous access ports. Am J Surg 198:829–833PubMedCrossRef
34.
Caers J, Fontaine C, Vinh-Hung V et al (2005) Catheter tip position as a risk factor for thrombosis associated with the use of subcutaneous infusion ports. Support Care Cancer 13:325–331PubMedCrossRef
35.
Chen PT, Sung CS, Wang CC, Chan KH, Chang WK, Hsu WH (2007) Experience of anesthesiologists with percutaneous nonangiographic venous access. J Clin Anesth 19:609–615PubMedCrossRef
36.
Biffi R, Orsi F, Pozzi S et al (2009) Best choice of central venous insertion site for the prevention of catheter-related complications in adult patients who need cancer therapy: a randomized trial. Annals of Oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology 20:935–940
37.
Stein M, Wagner RH (2005) Complications of central venous access devices: outcome analysis of 2359 implantations. Dtsch Med Wochenschr 130:1129–1132PubMedCrossRef
38.
Biffi R, Pozzi S, Agazzi A et al (2004) Use of totally implantable central venous access ports for high-dose chemotherapy and peripheral blood stem cell transplantation: results of a monocentre series of 376 patients. Annals of Oncology : official Journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology 15:296–300
39.
Vandoni RE, Guerra A, Sanna P, Bogen M, Cavalli F, Gertsch P (2009) Randomised comparison of complications from three different permanent central venous access systems. Swiss Med Wkly 139:313–316PubMed
40.
Shetty PC, Mody MK, Kastan DJ et al (1997) Outcome of 350 implanted chest ports placed by interventional radiologists. J Vasc Interv Radiol 8:991–995PubMedCrossRef
41.
Vardy J, Engelhardt K, Cox K et al (2004) Long-term outcome of radiological-guided insertion of implanted central venous access port devices (CVAPD) for the delivery of chemotherapy in cancer patients: institutional experience and review of the literature. Br J Cancer 91:1045–1049PubMed
42.
Aitken DR, Minton JP (1984) The “pinch-off sign”: a warning of impending problems with permanent subclavian catheters. Am J Surg 148:633–636PubMedCrossRef
43.
Hinke DH, Zandt-Stastny DA, Goodman LR, Quebbeman EJ, Krzywda EA, Andris DA (1990) Pinch-off syndrome: a complication of implantable subclavian venous access devices. Radiology 177:353–356PubMed
44.
Biffi R, De Braud F, Orsi F et al (2001) A randomized, prospective trial of central venous ports connected to standard open-ended or Groshong catheters in adult oncology patients. Cancer 92:1204–1212PubMedCrossRef
45.
Caridi JG, Hawkins IF Jr, Wiechmann BN, Pevarski DJ, Tonkin JC (1998) Sonographic guidance when using the right internal jugular vein for central vein access. AJR Am J Roentgenol 171:1259–1263PubMed
46.
Sofocleous CT, Schur I, Cooper SG, Quintas JC, Brody L, Shelin R (1998) Sonographically guided placement of peripherally inserted central venous catheters: review of 355 procedures. AJR Am J Roentgenol 170:1613–1616PubMed
47.
Liberman L, Hordof AJ, Hsu DT, Pass RH (2001) Ultrasound-assisted cannulation of the right internal jugular vein during electrophysiologic studies in children. J Interv Card Electrophysiol 5:177–179PubMedCrossRef
48.
Mey U, Glasmacher A, Hahn C et al (2003) Evaluation of an ultrasound-guided technique for central venous access via the internal jugular vein in 493 patients. Support Care Cancer 11:148–155PubMed
49.
Hind D, Calvert N, McWilliams R et al (2003) Ultrasonic locating devices for central venous cannulation: meta-analysis. BMJ 327:361PubMedCrossRef
50.
Petersen J, Delaney JH, Brakstad MT, Rowbotham RK, Bagley CM Jr (1999) Silicone venous access devices positioned with their tips high in the superior vena cava are more likely to malfunction. Am J Surg 178:38–41PubMedCrossRef
51.
DeChicco R, Seidner DL, Brun C, Steiger E, Stafford J, Lopez R (2007) Tip position of long-term central venous access devices used for parenteral nutrition. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr 31:382–387PubMedCrossRef
52.
Schutz JC, Patel AA, Clark TW et al (2004) Relationship between chest port catheter tip position and port malfunction after interventional radiologic placement. J Vasc Interv Radiol 15:581–587PubMed
53.
Trerotola SO, Kuhn-Fulton J, Johnson MS, Shah H, Ambrosius WT, Kneebone PH (2000) Tunneled infusion catheters: increased incidence of symptomatic venous thrombosis after subclavian versus internal jugular venous access. Radiology 217:89–93PubMed
54.
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 35:241–246PubMed
55.
Hsieh CC, Weng HH, Huang WS et al (2009) Analysis of risk factors for central venous port failure in cancer patients. World J Gastroenterol 15:4709–4714PubMedCrossRef
56.
Samaras P, Dold S, Braun J et al (2008) Infectious port complications are more frequent in younger patients with hematologic malignancies than in solid tumor patients. Oncology 74:237–244PubMedCrossRef
57.
Wolosker N, Yazbek G, Nishinari K et al (2004) Totally implantable venous catheters for chemotherapy: experience in 500 patients. Sao Paulo Med J 122:147–151PubMedCrossRef
58.
Hartkamp A, van Boxtel AJ, Zonnenberg BA, Witteveen PO (2000) Totally implantable venous access devices: evaluation of complications and a prospective comparative study of two different port systems. Neth J Med 57:215–223PubMedCrossRef
59.
Funaki B, Szymski GX, Hackworth CA et al (1997) Radiologic placement of subcutaneous infusion chest ports for long-term central venous access. AJR Am J Roentgenol 169:1431–1434PubMed
Metadata
Title
Outcome analysis in 3,160 implantations of radiologically guided placements of totally implantable central venous port systems
Authors
Ulf K. M. Teichgräber
Stephan Kausche
Sebastian N. Nagel
Bernhard Gebauer
Publication date
01-06-2011
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
European Radiology / Issue 6/2011
Print ISSN: 0938-7994
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1084
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-010-2045-7

Other articles of this Issue 6/2011

European Radiology 6/2011 Go to the issue

Letter to the Editor

Reply to Letter to the Editor re: Tumour thickness in oral cancer using an intraoral ultrasound probe

Nuclear Medicine

PET/CT without capacity limitations: a Danish experience from a European perspective

Breast

Assessment of breast cancer tumour size using six different methods

Musculoskeletal

Prediction of bone loss in elderly female subjects by MR perfusion imaging and spectroscopy

Gastrointestinal

Value of MRI and diffusion-weighted MRI for the diagnosis of locally recurrent rectal cancer

Urogenital

Indeterminate adnexal masses at ultrasound: effect of MRI imaging findings on diagnostic thinking and therapeutic decisions