Cargando…

Efficacy and clinical outcome of the port-a-cath in children: a tertiary care-center experience

BACKGROUND: Implanted vascular access devices play an essential role in the management of pediatric patients. The objectives of this study were to assess our experience with port-a-cath insertion in pediatric patients, report its complications, and compare open versus percutaneous approaches. METHOD...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bawazir, Osama, Banoon, Elaf
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7305599/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32560722
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12957-020-01912-w
_version_ 1783548496937222144
author Bawazir, Osama
Banoon, Elaf
author_facet Bawazir, Osama
Banoon, Elaf
author_sort Bawazir, Osama
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Implanted vascular access devices play an essential role in the management of pediatric patients. The objectives of this study were to assess our experience with port-a-cath insertion in pediatric patients, report its complications, and compare open versus percutaneous approaches. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study, including 568 patients who underwent port-a-cath insertion between 2013 and 2019 in our center. We grouped the patients according to the technique of insertion into two groups: group 1 (n = 168) included patients who had the open approach and group 2 (n = 404) included patients who had the percutaneous technique. (p < 0.001). RESULTS: Patients in group 1 were younger (4.10 ± 3.45 years) compared to patients in group 2 (5.47 ± 3.85 years). The main indications of insertion were hematological malignancy 57.74% (n = 328), solid organ malignancy 25.18% (n = 143), pure hematological diseases 5.46% (n = 31), metabolic diseases 2.64% (n = 15), and others for poor vascular access 8.8% (n = 50). The most common site for insertion in group 1 was the left external jugular (n = 136; 82.98%) and the left subclavian in group 2 (n = 203; 50.25%). Two hundred and two patients had a central line before catheter insertion (36.6%). Complications during insertion were comparable between both groups (p = 0.427). The catheter got stuck in 6 patients; all required additional incision and two needed venotomy. The most common reason to remove the catheter was the completion of the treatment (63.69% and 61.14%, in groups 1 and 2, respectively). The duration of the catheter was comparable between the two groups (13.14 ± 14.76 vs. 14.44 ± 14.04 months in group 1 vs.2; p = 0.327). CONCLUSIONS: Open and percutaneous port-a-cath insertions are safe in children with chronic diseases. Port-a-cath improved patients’ management, and complications are infrequent. The most common complications are infection and catheter malfunction, which can be managed without catheter removal in some patients.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7305599
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-73055992020-06-22 Efficacy and clinical outcome of the port-a-cath in children: a tertiary care-center experience Bawazir, Osama Banoon, Elaf World J Surg Oncol Research BACKGROUND: Implanted vascular access devices play an essential role in the management of pediatric patients. The objectives of this study were to assess our experience with port-a-cath insertion in pediatric patients, report its complications, and compare open versus percutaneous approaches. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study, including 568 patients who underwent port-a-cath insertion between 2013 and 2019 in our center. We grouped the patients according to the technique of insertion into two groups: group 1 (n = 168) included patients who had the open approach and group 2 (n = 404) included patients who had the percutaneous technique. (p < 0.001). RESULTS: Patients in group 1 were younger (4.10 ± 3.45 years) compared to patients in group 2 (5.47 ± 3.85 years). The main indications of insertion were hematological malignancy 57.74% (n = 328), solid organ malignancy 25.18% (n = 143), pure hematological diseases 5.46% (n = 31), metabolic diseases 2.64% (n = 15), and others for poor vascular access 8.8% (n = 50). The most common site for insertion in group 1 was the left external jugular (n = 136; 82.98%) and the left subclavian in group 2 (n = 203; 50.25%). Two hundred and two patients had a central line before catheter insertion (36.6%). Complications during insertion were comparable between both groups (p = 0.427). The catheter got stuck in 6 patients; all required additional incision and two needed venotomy. The most common reason to remove the catheter was the completion of the treatment (63.69% and 61.14%, in groups 1 and 2, respectively). The duration of the catheter was comparable between the two groups (13.14 ± 14.76 vs. 14.44 ± 14.04 months in group 1 vs.2; p = 0.327). CONCLUSIONS: Open and percutaneous port-a-cath insertions are safe in children with chronic diseases. Port-a-cath improved patients’ management, and complications are infrequent. The most common complications are infection and catheter malfunction, which can be managed without catheter removal in some patients. BioMed Central 2020-06-19 /pmc/articles/PMC7305599/ /pubmed/32560722 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12957-020-01912-w Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Bawazir, Osama
Banoon, Elaf
Efficacy and clinical outcome of the port-a-cath in children: a tertiary care-center experience
title Efficacy and clinical outcome of the port-a-cath in children: a tertiary care-center experience
title_full Efficacy and clinical outcome of the port-a-cath in children: a tertiary care-center experience
title_fullStr Efficacy and clinical outcome of the port-a-cath in children: a tertiary care-center experience
title_full_unstemmed Efficacy and clinical outcome of the port-a-cath in children: a tertiary care-center experience
title_short Efficacy and clinical outcome of the port-a-cath in children: a tertiary care-center experience
title_sort efficacy and clinical outcome of the port-a-cath in children: a tertiary care-center experience
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7305599/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32560722
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12957-020-01912-w
work_keys_str_mv AT bawazirosama efficacyandclinicaloutcomeoftheportacathinchildrenatertiarycarecenterexperience
AT banoonelaf efficacyandclinicaloutcomeoftheportacathinchildrenatertiarycarecenterexperience