• N C Gleeson, J V Fiorica, J E Mark, D M Pinelli, M S Hoffman, W S Roberts, and D Cavanagh.
• Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Tampa General Hospital, University of South Florida.
• Gynecol. Oncol. 1993 Dec 1; 51 (3): 372-6.

AbstractThere is a demand on gynecologic oncology services for semipermanent cannulization of central veins to improve the quality of life in cancer patients by circumventing the need for frequent peripheral venous punctures. Central venous thrombosis and sepsis are the major complications with these lines. We reviewed our experience with the externalized Groshong catheters and subcutaneously implanted Hickman ports in 104 gynecologic oncology patients requiring either chemotherapy (56), hyperalimentation (5), or supportive care (43). All devices were inserted under the supervision of one primary gynecologic oncologist. Groshong catheters and Hickman ports remained in place for a median of 68.5 and 210 days, respectively (P < 0.001). Thrombosis occurred in association with 4.8% of catheters and was exclusive to the Groshong catheters. Line sepsis occurred in 32% of Groshong catheters and 16.2% of Hickman ports (P = 0.04). Infection rates were not higher in dual-lumen compared to single-lumen Groshong catheters. Staphylococcus epidermidis was the comments isolate in line infections. The majority of lines were salvaged despite infectious complications. Malfunction of the catheter was equally common in both groups (10.5-13.5%), but was complete, necessitating replacement of only 2.9% of lines. The Groshong catheters took less time to insert (P < 0.003). The externalized Groshong catheter remains a useful alternative to the subcutaneously implanted ports, especially when relatively short-term use is anticipated, but gynecologic oncologists should be aware that there is an increased frequency of complications with the externalized catheter.

24 keywords...

hide…