High pressure versus standard port system: Comparison of implantation and complications

作者:Plumhans Cedric; Ocklenburg Christina; Verburg Frederik A; Guenther Rolf W; Behrendt Florian F*
来源:Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Oncology, 2012, 56(5): 532-537.
DOI:10.1111/j.1754-9485.2012.02439.x

摘要

Introduction: Completely implantable access ports for high pressure contrast media injection have been in use in clinical routine for a relatively short time. The purpose of our study was to compare a high pressure port system with a standard port system with regard to implantation and complications. %26lt;br%26gt;Methods: In 94 oncological patients a completely implantable access port was implanted. Patients (n = 49) planned for oncological follow-up computed tomography (CT) received a high pressure port system. Other patients (n = 45) received a standard port system. Intrainterventional pain perception, postinterventional catheter tip migration and complications were analyzed. %26lt;br%26gt;Results: No major periinterventional complications occurred. Intrainterventional pain perception was not significantly different between the two groups. A significantly lower rate of tip migration was observed in the high pressure port group (P = 0.03) and when the port system was implanted on the right side (P = 0.03). In the standard port group catheter occlusion occurred in three patients (7%) and a catheter loop in one patient (2%) whereas no such complications occurred within the high pressure port group. Venous thrombosis was detected in one patient (2%) with a high pressure port; this did not occur in the standard port group. %26lt;br%26gt;Conclusions: Implantation and use of a high pressure port device is safe and reliable: the complications are comparable to those of a standard port device. High pressure port systems should be considered for implantation, especially in patients who will require frequent CTs.