Comparing Outcomes of Two Implanted Port Central Venous Access Devices in Cancer Patients

癌症病患兩種中央靜脈導管系統之結果比較

侯紹敏(Shaw-Min Hou) ； 王拔群(Pa-Chun Wang) ； 宋詠娟(Yung-Chuan Sung) ； 李興中(Henry Hsin-Chung Lee) ； 劉漢鼎(Han-Ting Liu) ； 陳雅惠(Ya-Hui Chen)

《Formosan Journal of Surgery》 Volume 38 Issue 4 (2005/08) Pp. 165-171

https://doi.org/10.29833/FJS.200508.0002

Abstracts

Background: This study investigated the incidences of thrombosis occlusion, infection and surgical complications between two commercially available implanted port systems. The survival of port-A devices were analyzed.
Study Design: Medical records from 313 cancer patients who had received open-ended (Deltec) or closed-ended (Groshong) implanted port catheter insertions were retrospectively reviewed.
Methods: The crude infection rates, thrombosis rates, surgical complication rates (chi-square test), as well as total catheter indwelling days (t-test) were compared between closed- and open-ended implanted port system insertion groups. A Kaplan Meier analysis and a stratified log rank test were used to compare the probabilities of infection/thrombosis-free days of the 2 insertion groups. Logistic and multivariate regression models were applied to analyze the outcome predictors.
Results: The Groshong catheters (561±386.7 days) had greater (P＜0.001) mean total catheter indwelling days than did Deltec catheters (231±226.8 days). But the crude infection, thrombosis, and surgical complication rates failed to show statistically significant differences (P＞0.05) between closed- and open-ended implanted port system insertion groups. Surgical procedure (P=0.0002) and catheter type (P＜0.0001) were predictive of total catheter indwelling days. However, 2 types of catheters had similar survival rates at the end of follow up (P＞0.05).
Conclusion: Even though the Groshong closed-ended catheter may have a marginal advantage in total catheter indwelling days, we found the crude infection, thrombosis occlusion, and device survival rates were similar between Deltec and Groshong groups.

Parallel abstracts

Background: This study investigated the incidences of thrombosis occlusion, infection and surgical complications between two commercially available implanted port systems. The survival of port-A devices were analyzed.
Study Design: Medical records from 313 cancer patients who had received open-ended (Deltec) or closed-ended (Groshong) implanted port catheter insertions were retrospectively reviewed.
Methods: The crude infection rates, thrombosis rates, surgical complication rates (chi-square test), as well as total catheter indwelling days (t-test) were compared between closed- and open-ended implanted port system insertion groups. A Kaplan Meier analysis and a stratified log rank test were used to compare the probabilities of infection/thrombosis-free days of the 2 insertion groups. Logistic and multivariate regression models were applied to analyze the outcome predictors.
Results: The Groshong catheters (561±386.7 days) had greater (P＜0.001) mean total catheter indwelling days than did Deltec catheters (231±226.8 days). But the crude infection, thrombosis, and surgical complication rates failed to show statistically significant differences (P＞0.05) between closed- and open-ended implanted port system insertion groups. Surgical procedure (P=0.0002) and catheter type (P＜0.0001) were predictive of total catheter indwelling days. However, 2 types of catheters had similar survival rates at the end of follow up (P＞0.05).
Conclusion: Even though the Groshong closed-ended catheter may have a marginal advantage in total catheter indwelling days, we found the crude infection, thrombosis occlusion, and device survival rates were similar between Deltec and Groshong groups.

Parallel keywords

open-ended catheter ； closed-ended catheter ； infection ； thrombosis occlusion ； survival analysis