Expert consensus on the clinical application of totally implantable venous access devices in the upper arm(2022 Edition)

With the widespread adoption of ultrasound guidance,Seldinger puncture techniques,and intracardiac electrical positioning technology for the placement of peripherally inserted central catheters in recent years,an increasing number of medical staff and patients now accept peripheral placement of totally implantable venous access devices(TIVADs)in the upper arm.This approach has the advantage of completely avoiding the risks of hemothorax,pneumothorax,and neck and chest scarring.Medical specialties presently engaged in this study in China include internal medicine,surgery,anesthesiology,and interventional departments.However,command over implantation techniques,treatment of complications,and proper use and maintenance of TIVAD remain uneven among different medical units.Moreover,currently,there are no established quality control standards for implantation techniques or specifications for handling complications.Thus,this expert consensus is proposed to improve the success rate of TIVAD implantation via the upper-arm approach,reduce complication rates,and ensure patient safety.This consensus elaborates on the technical indications and contraindications,procedures and technical points,treatment of complications,and the use and maintenance of upper-arm TIVAD,thus providing a practical reference for medical staff.

A retrospective observational study on maintenance and complications of totally implantable venous access ports in 563 patients:Prolonged versus short flushing intervals

Objectives:To assess whether the extension of the flushing interval will increase risks of complications associated with totally implantable venous access port(TIVAP)in the off-treatment period.Methods:A retrospective single-center observational study was performed.Patients with a TIVAP in the off-treatment period that underwent regular flushing in our clinic were included.Data concerning patients and their TIVAPs were recorded.Patient baseline characteristics and TIVAP-related complications were analyzed.Continuous variables were analyzed by ANOVA or the Kruskal-Wallis H test.To compare the occurrence of TIVAP-related complications,the chi-square test was used;if needed,Fisher’s exact test was used.Results:Totally 607 patients were reviewed,and 563 patients were finally included.Thirteen complications were recorded,including 11 cases of catheter occlusion(1.95%),one case of port cannula rotation(0.18%),and one case of catheter tip malposition(0.18%).No device-related infection or venous thrombosis was recorded.Among these patients,the average flushing interval was 35.27±13.09 days.Patients were divided into three groups according to the flushing interval:every 28 days or less(Group 1,n=133);every 29-44 days(Group 2,n=350);and every 45 days or more(Group 3,n=80).No significant difference in catheter-related complications was found among the three groups(P>0.05).Conclusions:In the TIVAP off-treatment period,patients without any history of TIVAP-related complications during approximately one year can attempt to prolong the flushing interval to more than 4 weeks;we further suggest that 5-6 weeks may be an appropriate option for these patients.

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.