Clinical Course of Lung Cancer Patients with Subcutaneously Implanted Central Venous Access Device Ports from the Time of Receiving Chemotherapy to the Endpoint of Cancer

Background: As the prognosis of lung cancer (LC) patients improves, subcutaneously implanted central venous access device ports (CV-ports) have frequently been used for continuing chemotherapy (CC) or palliative care (PC). In this study, we examined the clinical course of LC patients with subcutaneously implanted CV-ports from the time of receiving chemotherapy to the endpoint of cancer. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the clinical data and treatment history of LC patients with subcutaneously implanted CV-ports between June 2008 and November 2013 using clinical records and a pharmacy database. Results: Of the 132 LC patients with subcutaneously implanted CV-ports, 79 (59.8%) had CV-ports for CC (the CC group) and 53 (40.2%) had CV-ports for PC (the PC group). After CV-port implantation, LC patients in the CC group received a median of two regimens with a median of 6 cycles. The median survival time of patients in the CC and PC groups was 457 and 44 days, respectively. In the CC group, the median survival time of small cell and non-small cell LC patients was 342 (95% confidence interval, 235 - 627) and 563 (95% confidence interval, 368 - 728) days, respectively. Nine patients (6.8%) had their CV-ports removed due to complications. Forty (30.3%) of the 132 enrolled patients were referred for at-home PC. The at-home death rate observed among these 40 patients was 30.0% (N = 12). Conclusion: CV-ports may contribute to seamless oncological care.

Impact of central venous port implantation method and access choice on outcomes

BACKGROUND Although the number of patients who need central venous ports for permanent vascular access is increasing,there is still no“gold standard”for the implantation technique.AIM To identify the implantation technique that should be favored.METHODS Two hundred central venous port-implanted patients in a tertiary hospital were retrospectively evaluated.Patients were assigned into two groups according to the access method.The first group comprised patients whose jugular veins were used,and the second group comprised patients whose subclavian veins were used.Groups were evaluated regarding age,sex,application side,primary diagnosis,active follow-up period in the hospital,chemotherapy agents administered,number of complications,and the Clavien-Dindo severity score.The distribution of the variables was tested with the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test and the Mann-Whitney U test.Theχ^(2) test was used to analyze the variables.RESULTS There was no statistically significant difference between the groups regarding age,sex,side,number of chemotherapy drugs,and duration of port usage(P>0.05).Only 2 patients in group 1 had complications,whereas in group 2 we observed 19 patients with complications(P<0.05).No port occlusion was found in group 1,but the catheters of 4 patients were occluded in group 2.One port was infected in group 1 compared to three infected ports in group 2.Two port ruptures,two pneumothorax,one revision due to a mechanical problem,one tachyarrhythmia during implantation,and four suture line problems were also recorded in group 2 patients.We also showed that it would be sufficient to evaluate and wash ports once every 2 mo.CONCLUSION Our results robustly confirm that the jugular vein route is safer than the subclavian vein approach for central venous port implantation.

Analysis of risk factors for central venous port failure in cancer patients

AIM: To analyze the risk factors for central port failure in cancer patients administered chemotherapy, using univariate and multivariate analyses. METHODS: A total of 1348 totally implantable venous access devices (TIVADs) were implanted into 1280 cancer patients in this cohort study. A Cox proportional hazard model was applied to analyze risk factors for failure of TIVADs. Log-rank test was used to compare actuarial survival rates. Infection, thrombosis, and surgical complication rates (χ2 test or Fisher's exact test) were compared in relation to the risk factors. RESULTS: Increasing age, male gender and openended catheter use were signifi cant risk factors reducing survival of TIVADs as determined by univariate and multivariate analyses. Hematogenous malignancy decreased the survival time of TIVADs; this reduction was not statistically signifi cant by univariate analysis [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.336, 95% CI: 0.966-1.849, P = 0.080)]. However, it became a signifi cant risk factor by multivariate analysis (HR = 1.499, 95% CI: 1.079-2.083, P = 0.016) when correlated with variables of age, sex and catheter type. Close-ended (Groshong) catheters had a lower thrombosis rate than open-ended catheters (2.5% vs 5%, P = 0.015). Hematogenous malignancy had higher infection rates than solid malignancy (10.5% vs 2.5%, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Increasing age, male gender, openended catheters and hematogenous malignancy were risk factors for TIVAD failure. Close-ended catheters had lower thrombosis rates and hematogenous malignancy had higher infection rates.

Central venous port placement in advanced breast cancer patients:comparison of the anatomic- landmark and ultrasound-guided techniques

Objective： The aim of this study was to compare the anatomic-landmark and ultrasound-guided techniques in the placement of an internal jugular vein port in patients with advanced breast cancer. Methods： Between March 2010 and October 2010, 60 patients with advanced breast cancer underwent central venous port placement for the delivery of chemotherapy, preferably through the internal jugular vein. Patients were randomly assigned to either the anatomic-landmark or the ultrasound-guided group. Failure on first attempt, number of attempts until successful catheterization, time to successful placement, the accordance of the two placement approaches, and the demographics of each patient were recorded. Results： The consistency of the direction of two lines drawn using the anatomic-landmark and ultrasound-guided techniques or of the diameter of the internal jugular vein as determined by the two approaches was 85% （51/60）. The rate of successful place- ment at first attempt was higher in the ultrasound group than in the anatomic-landmark group （P 〈 0.05）. A greater number of attempts and longer time to successful port placement were needed in the latter （P 〈 0.05）. Conclusion： The findings of this study indicate that, in the placement of an internal jugular vein port, the ultrasound （US）-guJded technique has several advantages over the anatomic-landmark technique.