PMID- 21127864
OWN - NLM
STAT- MEDLINE
DCOM- 20120427
LR  - 20220409
IS  - 1432-086X (Electronic)
IS  - 0174-1551 (Linking)
VI  - 34
IP  - 6
DP  - 2011 Dec
TI  - Subclavian vein versus arm vein for totally implantable central venous port for 
      patients with head and neck cancer: a retrospective comparative analysis.
PG  - 1222-9
LID - 10.1007/s00270-010-0051-4 [doi]
AB  - PURPOSE: This study was designed to compare central venous ports (CVP) from two 
      different routes of venous access-the subclavian vein and arm vein-in terms of 
      safety for patients with head and neck cancer (HNC). METHODS: Patients with HNC 
      who underwent image-guided implantations of CVPs were retrospectively evaluated. 
      All CVPs were implanted under local anesthesia. Primary outcome measurements were 
      rates and types of adverse events (AEs). Secondary outcomes included technical 
      success and rate and reason of CVP removal. RESULTS: A total of 162 patients 
      (subclavian port group, 47; arm port group, 115) were included in this study. 
      Technical success was achieved in all patients. The median follow-up period was 
      94 (range, 1-891) days. Two patients in the subclavian port group experienced 
      periprocedural complications. Postprocedural AEs were observed in 8.5 and 22.6% 
      of the subclavian port and arm port group patients, respectively (P = 0.044). 
      Phlebitis and system occlusions were observed only in the arm port group. The 
      rate of infection was not significantly different between the two groups. The CVP 
      was removed in 34 and 39.1% of the subclavian port and arm port patients, 
      respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Both subclavian and arm CVPs are feasible in patients 
      with HNC. AEs were more frequent in the arm port group; thus, the arm port is not 
      recommended as the first choice for patients with HNC. However, further 
      experience is needed to improve the placement technique and the maintenance of 
      CVPs and a prospective analysis is warranted.
FAU - Akahane, Akio
AU  - Akahane A
AD  - Department of Radiology, Iwate Medical University School of Medicine, 19-1 
      Uchimaru, Morioka 020-8505, Japan. a.akahane@gmail.com
FAU - Sone, Miyuki
AU  - Sone M
FAU - Ehara, Shigeru
AU  - Ehara S
FAU - Kato, Kenichi
AU  - Kato K
FAU - Tanaka, Ryoichi
AU  - Tanaka R
FAU - Nakasato, Tatsuhiko
AU  - Nakasato T
LA  - eng
PT  - Comparative Study
PT  - Journal Article
DEP - 20101203
PL  - United States
TA  - Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol
JT  - Cardiovascular and interventional radiology
JID - 8003538
SB  - IM
EIN - Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2011 Dec;34(6):1334-5
CIN - Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2013 Jun;36(3):874-5. PMID: 22678237
CIN - Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2013 Jun;36(3):876. PMID: 22678238
MH  - Adult
MH  - Aged
MH  - Aged, 80 and over
MH  - Angiography
MH  - Arm/*blood supply
MH  - Catheterization, Central Venous/*methods
MH  - Chi-Square Distribution
MH  - Head and Neck Neoplasms/*drug therapy
MH  - Humans
MH  - Middle Aged
MH  - Postoperative Complications
MH  - Radiography, Interventional
MH  - Retrospective Studies
MH  - *Subclavian Vein
MH  - Treatment Outcome
EDAT- 2010/12/04 06:00
MHDA- 2012/04/28 06:00
CRDT- 2010/12/04 06:00
PHST- 2010/08/21 00:00 [received]
PHST- 2010/11/09 00:00 [accepted]
PHST- 2010/12/04 06:00 [entrez]
PHST- 2010/12/04 06:00 [pubmed]
PHST- 2012/04/28 06:00 [medline]
AID - 10.1007/s00270-010-0051-4 [doi]
PST - ppublish
SO  - Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2011 Dec;34(6):1222-9. doi: 
      10.1007/s00270-010-0051-4. Epub 2010 Dec 3.