{"title":"Complications Associated With Totally Implanted Venous Access Devices in the Arm Versus the Chest: A Short-Term Retrospective Study.","authors":"Samuel Pike, Kiat Tan, Brent Burbridge","doi":"10.1177/08465371211040822","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To retrospectively compare complications for totally implanted venous access devices (TIVADs or ports) in the arm vs. the chest. One participating institution implanted all TIVADs in the arm, whereas the other institution implanted them in the chest.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Subjects were consecutive patients > 18 years with a device inserted between July 2017 and January 2019 at either Hospital A, where all devices were implanted in the arm, or at Hospital B, where all devices were implanted in the chest. Complications (rates/1,000 catheter-days and frequencies) were compared between the arm and chest locations.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>201 arm devices (71% female, mean age 59.4 years) and 203 chest devices (66% female, mean age 61.5 years) were assessed. Overall complication rates did not differ between the arm and chest [arm: 30 complications per 56,938 catheter-days (0.530/1,000 catheter-days) vs. chest: 47 complications per 63,324 catheter-days (0.742/1,000 catheter-days), p-value 0.173]. Periprocedural complications and mechanical malfunction also did not differ. Although prophylactic antibiotic use was higher in the chest (79.3% vs. 1.50%, p-value < 0.0001), infection rates did not differ. Arm venous thrombosis was significantly higher in the arm cohort (0.205 vs. 0.017/1,000 catheter-days, p-value 0.003) and pulmonary thromboembolism in the chest cohort (0.269 vs 0.056/1,000 catheter-days, p-value 0.002).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>While arm venous thrombosis was higher in the arm and pulmonary thromboembolism in the chest cohort, other complications were similar. Antibiotic use was more frequent in the chest cohort, while infection rates remained similar in both cohorts.</p>","PeriodicalId":444006,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Association of Radiologists journal = Journal l'Association canadienne des radiologistes","volume":" ","pages":"581-588"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Canadian Association of Radiologists journal = Journal l'Association canadienne des radiologistes","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/08465371211040822","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/12/15 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose: To retrospectively compare complications for totally implanted venous access devices (TIVADs or ports) in the arm vs. the chest. One participating institution implanted all TIVADs in the arm, whereas the other institution implanted them in the chest.
Methods: Subjects were consecutive patients > 18 years with a device inserted between July 2017 and January 2019 at either Hospital A, where all devices were implanted in the arm, or at Hospital B, where all devices were implanted in the chest. Complications (rates/1,000 catheter-days and frequencies) were compared between the arm and chest locations.
Results: 201 arm devices (71% female, mean age 59.4 years) and 203 chest devices (66% female, mean age 61.5 years) were assessed. Overall complication rates did not differ between the arm and chest [arm: 30 complications per 56,938 catheter-days (0.530/1,000 catheter-days) vs. chest: 47 complications per 63,324 catheter-days (0.742/1,000 catheter-days), p-value 0.173]. Periprocedural complications and mechanical malfunction also did not differ. Although prophylactic antibiotic use was higher in the chest (79.3% vs. 1.50%, p-value < 0.0001), infection rates did not differ. Arm venous thrombosis was significantly higher in the arm cohort (0.205 vs. 0.017/1,000 catheter-days, p-value 0.003) and pulmonary thromboembolism in the chest cohort (0.269 vs 0.056/1,000 catheter-days, p-value 0.002).
Conclusions: While arm venous thrombosis was higher in the arm and pulmonary thromboembolism in the chest cohort, other complications were similar. Antibiotic use was more frequent in the chest cohort, while infection rates remained similar in both cohorts.
目的:回顾性比较全植入式静脉通路装置(TIVADs或端口)在手臂和胸部的并发症。一个参与机构将所有的tivad植入手臂,而另一个机构将它们植入胸部。方法:研究对象为2017年7月至2019年1月期间在a医院(所有装置都植入手臂)或B医院(所有装置都植入胸部)连续植入装置的18岁以上患者。比较手臂和胸部部位的并发症(发生率/1,000导管日和频率)。结果:评估201个手臂装置(71%为女性,平均年龄59.4岁)和203个胸部装置(66%为女性,平均年龄61.5岁)。总体并发症发生率在手臂和胸部之间没有差异[手臂:30并发症/ 56,938导管天(0.530/1,000导管天),胸部:47并发症/ 63,324导管天(0.742/1,000导管天),p值0.173]。围手术期并发症和机械故障也无差异。尽管预防性抗生素的使用在胸部较高(79.3% vs. 1.50%, p值< 0.0001),但感染率没有差异。臂组静脉血栓发生率显著高于臂组(0.205 vs 0.017/ 1000导管天,p值0.003),胸组肺血栓栓塞发生率显著高于臂组(0.269 vs 0.056/ 1000导管天,p值0.002)。结论:虽然上臂静脉血栓发生率较高,胸部组肺血栓栓塞发生率较高,但其他并发症相似。抗生素的使用在胸部队列中更为频繁,而感染率在两个队列中保持相似。