CVAD safety in patients with cancer


Intravenous literature: Kim, H.J., Yun, J., Kim, H.J., Kim, K.H., Kim, S.H., Lee, S.C., Bae, S.B., Kim, C.K., Lee, N.S., Lee, K.T., Park, S.K., Won, J.H., Park, H.S. and Hong, D.S. (2010) Safety and effectiveness of central venous catheterization in patients with cancer: prospective observational study. Journal of Korean Medical Science. 25(12), p.1748-53.


This study investigated the safety and effectiveness of each type of central venous catheters (CVC) in patients with cancer. We prospectively enrolled patients with cancer who underwent catheterization involving a subclavian venous catheter (SVC), peripherally inserted central venous catheter (PICC), or chemo-port (CP) in our department. From March 2007 to March 2009, 116 patients underwent 179 episodes of catheterization. A SVC was inserted most frequently (46.4%). Fifty-four complications occurred (30.1%): infection in 23 cases, malpositioning or migration of the tip in 18 cases, thrombosis in eight cases, and bleeding in five cases. Malpositioning or migration of the tip occurred more frequently with a PICC (P<0.001); infection occurred more often with a tunneled catheter (P=0.028) and was observed more often in young patients (P=0.023). The catheter life span was longer for patients with solid cancer (P=0.002) than for those with hematologic cancer, with a CP (P<0.001) than a PICC or SVC, and for an indwelling catheter with image guidance (P=0.014) than a blind procedure. In conclusion, CP is an effective tool for long term use and the fixation of tip is important for the management of PICC.

Main page


Comments are closed.