Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Increased Use of Percutaneous Technique for Totally Implantable Venous Access Devices. Is It Real Progress? A 27-Year Comprehensive Review on Early Complications

  • Medical Oncology
  • Published:
Annals of Surgical Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

First implantation of a totally implantable venous access device (TIVAD) was performed in 1982 with surgical technique. Since then, these devices have permitted infusion of total parenteral nutrition, antibiotics, blood products, and, above all, they have definitively changed the quality of life of patients with cancer. However, with the increase of percutaneous procedures, we have assisted with a concomitant raise of immediate postprocedural life-threatening complications. The aim of this study was to review the literature during a 27-year period, with regard to the changes of incidence of immediate complications after percutaneous or surgical cutdown for TIVAD’s implant.

Materials and Methods

An extensive search of relevant literature was carried out by using MEDLINE (PubMed) and Google Scholar. We gathered articles from 1982 to 2009 that quoted patient’s number, type of pathology, specialist involved, number of devices implanted, site and technique of implantation (surgical cutdown or percutaneous technique), and immediate complications occurrence.

Results

A total of 952 reports were screened, and finally only 45 articles addressing all inclusion criteria were used for the present study. A total of 11,430 TIVADs implanted in 11,381 patients were analyzed. Pneumothorax, hemothorax, arterial puncture, and hemoptysis developed only after percutaneous procedures. Atrial fibrillation, hematomas, and malpositioning were more frequent after percutaneous approach. The total amount of immediate complications in patients submitted to percutaneous implant was 4.5%, compared with 0.9% subsequent to cutdown technique.

Conclusions

Despite the increased use of percutaneous technique for TIVADs’ implantation, surgical cutdown, because of its safety, remains the best approach to avoid possible fatal immediate complications.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Dudrick JJ, Wilmore DW, Vars HM, Rhoads JE. Long-term total parenteral nutrition with growth development and positive nitrose balance. Surgery. 1968;64:134–42.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Niederhuber JE, Ensminger W, Gyves JW, Liepman M, Doan K, Cozzi E. Totally implanted venous and arterial access system to replace external catheters in cancer treatment. Surgery. 1982;92:706–12.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Starkhammar H, Bengtsson M. Totally implanted device for venous access. Experience in tumour patients. Acta Radiol Oncol. 1985;24:173–6.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Morris SL, Jaques PF, Mauro MA. Radiology-assisted placement of implantable subcutaneous infusion ports for long-term venous access. Radiology. 1992;184:149–51.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Laurenzi L, Fimiani C, Faglieri N, Natoli S, Milasi G, Tirelli W, et al. Complications with fully implantable venous access systems in oncologic patients. Tumori. 1996;82:232–6.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Lorch H, Zwaan M, Kagel C, Weiss HD. Central venous access ports placed by interventional radiologists: experience with 125 consecutive patients. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2001;24:180–4.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Munro FD, Gillett PM, Wratten JC, Shaw MP, Thomas A, MacKinlay GA, et al. Totally implantable central venous access devices for paediatric oncology patients. Med Pediatr Oncol. 1999;33:377–81.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Deogaonkar K, Shokrollahi K, Dickson WA. Haemothorax: a potentially fatal complication of subclavian cannulation—a case report. Resuscitation. 2007;72:161–3.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Lewis CA, Allen TE, Burke DR, Cardella JF, Citron SJ, Cole PE. Quality improvement guidelines for central venous access. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 1997;8:475–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Lewis CA, Allen TE, Burke DR, Cardella JF, Citron SJ, Cole PE, et al. Society of Interventional Radiology Standards of Practice Committee. Quality improvement guidelines for central venous access. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2003;14:S231–5.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Bothe A Jr, Piccione W, Ambrosino JJ, Benotti PN, Lokich JJ. Implantable central venous access system. Am J Surg. 1984;147:565–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Champault G. (1985) Completely implantable catheters for anticancer chemotherapy. A French experience of 325 cases. J Chir (Paris). 122:269–72.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Stanislav GV, Fitzgibbons RJ Jr, Bailey RT Jr, Mailliard JA, Johnson PS, Feole JB. Reliability of implantable central venous access devices in patients with cancer. Arch Surg. 1987;122:1280–3.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Koonings PP, Given FT Jr. Long-term experience with a totally implanted catheter system in gynecologic oncologic patients. J Am Coll Surg. 1994;178:164–6.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Bertoglio S, Meszsaros P, Disomma C, Moresco L, Cafiero F, Gipponi M, et al. Long-term central venous access in oncology. Review of a caseload of 750 cases. Minerva Chir. 1996;51:427–31.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Aldrighetti L, Paganelli M, Caterini R, Catena M, Ronzoni M, Ferla G. Safety and efficiency of totally implantable devices for prolonged venous access. A prospective study. J Chemother. 1996;8:393–6.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Ballarini C, Intra M, Pisani Ceretti A, Cordovana A, Prestipino F, Farina G, et al. Le complicanze precoci e tardive dei sistemi venosi impiantabili per chemioterapia a lungo termine nei pazienti oncologici. Osp Ital Chir. 1997;6:517–23.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Miller K, Buchanan GR, Zappa S, Cochran C, Laufenberg J, Medeiros D, et al. Implantable venous access devices in children with hemophilia: a report of low infection rates. J Pediatr. 1998;132:934–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Domingo P, Fontanet A, Sánchez F, Allende L, Vazquez G. Morbidity associated with long-term use of totally implantable ports in patients with AIDS. Clin Infect Dis. 1999;29:346–51.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Boussen H, Mtaallah M, Dhiab T, Khalfallah S, Jerbi G, Hechiche M, et al. Evaluation of implantable sites in medical oncology in Tunisia. Prospective study of 205 cases. Ann Fr Anesth Reanim. 2001;20:509–13.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Lorenz JM, Funaki B, Van Ha T, Leef JA. Radiologic placement of implantable chest ports in pediatric patients. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2001;176:991–4.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Yip D, Funaki B. Subcutaneous chest ports via the internal jugular vein. A retrospective study of 117 oncology patients. Acta Radiol. 2002;43:371–5.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Carlo JT, Lamont JP, McCarty TM, Livingston S, Kuhn JA. A prospective randomized trial demonstrating valved implantable ports have fewer complications and lower overall cost than nonvalved implantable ports, Am J Surg. 2004;188:722–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Biffi R, Pozzi S, Agazzi A, Pace U, Floridi A, Cenciarelli S, et al. 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. Ann Oncol. 2004;15:296–300.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Charvát J, Linke Z, Horáèková M, Prausová J. Implantation of central venous ports with catheter insertion via the right internal jugular vein in oncology patients: single center experience. Support Care Cancer. 2006;14:1162–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Cil BE, Canyiğit M, Peynircioğlu B, Hazirolan T, Carkaci S, Cekirge S, et al. Subcutaneous venous port implantation in adult patients: a single center experience. Diagn Interv Radiol. 2006;12:93–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Araújo C, Silva JP, Antunes P, Fernandes JM, Dias C, Pereira H, et al. A comparative study between two central veins for the introduction of totally implantable venous access devices in 1201 cancer patients. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2008;34:222–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Gebauer B, El-Sheik M, Vogt M, Wagner HJ. Combined ultrasound and fluoroscopy guided port catheter implantation—high success and low complication rate. Eur J Radiol. 2009;69:517–22.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Vandoni RE, Guerra A, Sanna P, Bogen M, Cavalli F, Gertsch P. Randomised comparison of complications from three different permanent central venous access systems. Swiss Med Wkly. 2009;139:313–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Bobin JY. Implantable chambers for intravenous cytotoxic chemotherapy. Experience of 9 anticancer centers. Presse Med. 1986;15:911–4.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Fraioli JP, Schwarzenberg L. Implantable direct intravenous access: technic, complications, outcome. Apropos of 237 cases. J Chir (Paris). 1988;125:638–41.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Harvey WH, Pick TE, Reed K, Solenberger RI. A prospective evaluation of the Port-A-Cath implantable venous access system in chronically ill adults and children. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1989;169:495–500.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Comandella MG, Rossi M, Finco C, Pittoni G, Pianalto S, Cadamuro MC, et al. The use of totally implantable systems (TIS) for long-term endovenous therapy. G Chir. 1993;14:185–9.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Tazzioli G, Roncaglia G. Impiego dei sitemi venosi totalmente impiantabili nelle terapie infusive di lunga durata. Chir. 1995;8:93–5.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Di Giorgio A, Bargrazi C, Canavese A, Arnone P, Barberio Corsetti F, et al. Sistemi totalmente impiantabili in oncologia: la vena cefalica come via d’accesso di elezione. Ann Ital Chir. 1997;68:529–37.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Kariyawasam HH, Pepper JR, Hodson ME, Geddes DM. Experience of totally implantable venous access devices (TIV ADs) in adults with cystic fibrosis over a 13-year period. Respir Med. 2000;94:1161–5.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Stas M, Mulier S, Pattyn P, Vijgen J, De Wever I. Peroperative intravasal electrographic control of catheter tip position in access ports placed by venous cut-down technique. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2001;27:316–20.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Johansson E, Björkholm M, Björvell H, Hast R, Takolander R, Olofsson P, et al. Totally implantable subcutaneous port system versus central venous catheter placed before induction chemotherapy in patients with acute leukaemia—a randomized study. Support Care Cancer. 2004;12:99–105.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Marcy PY, Magné N, Castadot P, Bailet C, Macchiavello JC, Namer M, et al. Radiological and surgical placement of port devices: a 4-year institutional analysis of procedure performance, quality of life and cost in breast cancer patients. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2005;92:61–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Di Carlo I, Barbagallo F, Toro A, Sofia M, Lombardo R, Cordio S. External jugular vein cutdown approach, as a useful alternative, supports the choice of the cephalic vein for totally implantable access device placement. Ann Surg Oncol. 2005;12:570–3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Bruni R, Bartolucci R, Chirco L. I sistemi d’accesso venoso totalmente impiantabili. Chir. 1996;9:146–9.

    Google Scholar 

  42. D’Angelo FA, Ramacciato G, Aurello P, Lauro S, Caramitti A, Lalle M, et al. Alternative insertion sites for permanent central venous access devices. Eur J Surg Oncol. 1997;23:547–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Kock HJ, Pietsch M, Krause U, Wilke H, Eigler FW. Implantable vascular access systems: experience in 1500 patients with totally implanted central venous port systems. World J Surg. 1998;22:12–16.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Sarzo G, Finco C, Parise P, Savastano S, Portale G, Vecchiato M, et al. Immediate and long-term complication of prolonged venous access device (PVAD): a comparison between surgical cutdown and percutaneous techniques. Int J Angiol. 2004;13:203–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Wolosker N, Yazbek G, Nishinari K, Malavolta LC, Minia MA, Langer M, et al. Totally implantable venous catheters for chemotherapy: experience in 500 patients. Sao Paulo Med J. 2004;122:147–51.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Povoski SP. External jugular vein cutdown approach for chronic indwelling central venous access in cancer patients: a potentially useful alternative. World J Surg Oncol. 2004;2:7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Chang HM, Hsieh CB, Hsieh HF, Chen TW, Chen CJ, Chan DC, Yet al. An alternative technique for totally implantable central venous access devices. A retrospective study of 1311 cases. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2006;32:90–3.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Seiler CM, Frohlich BE, Dorsam UJ, Kienle P, Buchler MW, Knaebel HP. Surgical technique for totally implantable access ports (TIAP) needs improvement: a multivariate analysis of 400 patients. J Surg Oncol. 2006;93:24–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Jablon LK, Ugolini KR, Nahmias NC. Cephalic vein cut-down verses percutaneous access: a retrospective study of complications of implantable venous access devices. Am J Surg. 2006;192:63–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Chen PT, Sung CS, Wang CC, Chan KH, Chang WK, Hsu WH. Experience of anesthesiologists with percutaneous nonangiographic venous access. J Clin Anesth. 2007;19:609–15.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Broviac JW, Cole JJ, Scribner BH. A silicone rubber atrial catheter for prolonged parenteral alimentation. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1973;136:602–6.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  52. Hall P, Cedermark B, Swedendorg J. Implantable catheter system for long-term intravenous chemotherapy. J Surg Oncol. 1989;41:39–41.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  53. Grannan KJ, Taylor PH. Early and late complications of totally implantable venous access devices. J Surg Oncol. 1990;44:52–4.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  54. Mansfield PF, Hohn DC, Fornage BD, Gregurich MA, Ota DM. Complications and failures of subclavian-vein catheterization. N Engl J Med. 1994;331:1735–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  55. Biffi R, Pozzi S, Cenciarelli S, Zambelli M, Andreoni B. Treatment of pneumothorax as a complication of long-term central venous port placement in oncology patients. An observational study. J Vasc Access. 2001;2:129–36.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  56. Biffi R, de Braud F, Orsi F, Possi S, Mauri S, Golhirsch A, et al. Totally implantable central venous access ports for long-term chemotherapy. Ann Oncol. 1998;9:767–73.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  57. Nicholson T, Ettles D, Robinson G. Managing inadvertent arterial catheterization during central venous access procedures. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2004;27:21–5.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Bernard RW, Stahl WM. Subclavian vein catheterizations: a prospective study. I. Non-infectious complications. Ann Surg. 1971;173:184–90.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  59. Povoski SP. A prospective analysis of the cephalic vein cutdown approach for chronic indwelling central venous access in 100 consecutive cancer patients. Ann Surg Oncol. 2000;7:496–502.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  60. Brothers TE, Von Moll LK, Niederhuber JE, Roberts JA, Walker-Andrews S, Ensminger WD. Experience with subcutaneous infusion ports in three hundred patients. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1988;166:295–301.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgical Sciences, Organ Transplantation, and Advanced Technologies, University of Catania, Catania, Italy

    Isidoro Di Carlo MD, PhD, FACS, Elia Pulvirenti MD, Maurizio Mannino & Adriana Toro MD

Authors
  1. Isidoro Di Carlo MD, PhD, FACS
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Elia Pulvirenti MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Maurizio Mannino
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Adriana Toro MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Isidoro Di Carlo MD, PhD, FACS.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Di Carlo, I., Pulvirenti, E., Mannino, M. et al. Increased Use of Percutaneous Technique for Totally Implantable Venous Access Devices. Is It Real Progress? A 27-Year Comprehensive Review on Early Complications. Ann Surg Oncol 17, 1649–1656 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-010-1005-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-010-1005-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation