Skip to main content
Top
Published in: CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology 3/2008

01-05-2008 | Letter to the Editor

The Percutaneous Radiological Correction Rate Is 0.5% in Upper Extremity Port Device Cancer Patients

Authors: Pierre-Yves Marcy, Antoine Italiano

Published in: CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology | Issue 3/2008

Login to get access

Excerpt

I read with great interest the recent article by Gebauer et al. [1]. There is no doubt that percutaneous interventional radiological procedures nowadays represent the gold standard in the correction of central venous catheter malposition, except in some particular cases including venous thrombosis, small catheter-bearing veins, and deeply embedded catheters. We share the authors’ opinion concerning the higher rate of malpositionned catheters in surgically implanted port patients. This is due to the absence of real-time fluoroscopy monitoring during catheterization and catheter tip positionning [2]. According to a personal survey concerning 1000 arm port device insertions using image guidance, the reported rate of malpositioned catheters was 0.5% [3], which is far lower than the rate of 6% reported in surgical series [1]. Two patients suffered from palpitations due to a too-long catheter tip beating into the atrium; two patients had ipsilateral and contralateral migration in the internal jugular vein, respectively; and one obese patient (body mass index, 41) had a catheter tip retraction in the ipsilateral left innominate vein. The latter presented with a bulky mediastinal tumor inducing pronounced catheter kinks. In such a case, we do think that the catheter tip must be placed 1 to 2 cm below the regular position (atrial caval junction) due to the risk of liberation of original catheter elasticity during daily-life activities of the patient. During the procedure, when the back end of the catheter moves down 1 cm, elasticity will cause its tip to move another 2 cm farther down. Flexibility of a too-short implanted catheter may move upstream when the patient coughs, moves upright, or moves the arms [4, 5]. We strongly recommend testing the catheter course and tip location under those conditions before connecting the catheter to the port chamber during placement. Furthermore, considering the high incidence of catheter tip migration in the internal jugular vein (>50%) in chest and arm ports [1, 3], the patient must be told to consult when presenting with otalgia or lateral neck pain, especially in the case of blind surgical device placement and bulky mediastinal tumors. We do think that the extremely low rate of migrated catheters (0.5%) at our institution is due to the rigor of catheter tip placement under fluoroscopy and per operative testing of the catheter elasticity reserve. …
Literature
1.
go back to reference Gebauer B, Teichgräber UK, Podrabsky P, et al. (2007) Radiological interventions for correction of central venous port catheter migrations. CardioVasc Interv Radiol 30:668–674CrossRef Gebauer B, Teichgräber UK, Podrabsky P, et al. (2007) Radiological interventions for correction of central venous port catheter migrations. CardioVasc Interv Radiol 30:668–674CrossRef
2.
go back to reference Puel V, Caudry M, Le Metayer P, et al. (1993) Superior vena cava thrombosis related to catheter malposition in cancer chemotherapy given through implanted ports. Cancer 72(7):2248–2852PubMedCrossRef Puel V, Caudry M, Le Metayer P, et al. (1993) Superior vena cava thrombosis related to catheter malposition in cancer chemotherapy given through implanted ports. Cancer 72(7):2248–2852PubMedCrossRef
3.
go back to reference Marcy PY, Bailet C, Descamps B, et al. (2003) Arm port devices: feasibility, efficacy and impact on quality of life in 1000 cancer patients between 19 and 90 years of age. AJR 180(Suppl):63 Marcy PY, Bailet C, Descamps B, et al. (2003) Arm port devices: feasibility, efficacy and impact on quality of life in 1000 cancer patients between 19 and 90 years of age. AJR 180(Suppl):63
4.
go back to reference Wong C, Joshi N, Nachimuthu S, et al. (2001) Cough in a patient with an infusion port. Chest 120:1031–1033PubMedCrossRef Wong C, Joshi N, Nachimuthu S, et al. (2001) Cough in a patient with an infusion port. Chest 120:1031–1033PubMedCrossRef
5.
go back to reference Forauer AR, Alonzo M (2000) Change in peripherally inserted central catheter tip position with abduction and adduction of the upper extremity. J Vasc Interv Radiol 11(10):1315–1318PubMedCrossRef Forauer AR, Alonzo M (2000) Change in peripherally inserted central catheter tip position with abduction and adduction of the upper extremity. J Vasc Interv Radiol 11(10):1315–1318PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
The Percutaneous Radiological Correction Rate Is 0.5% in Upper Extremity Port Device Cancer Patients
Authors
Pierre-Yves Marcy
Antoine Italiano
Publication date
01-05-2008
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology / Issue 3/2008
Print ISSN: 0174-1551
Electronic ISSN: 1432-086X
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00270-007-9212-5

Other articles of this Issue 3/2008

CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology 3/2008 Go to the issue