• Eur J Radiol · Dec 2009

    Clinical Trial

    Central venous infusion port inserted via high versus low jugular venous approaches: retrospective comparison of outcome and complications.

    • Hong Suk Park, Young Il Kim, Sang Hyun Lee, Jung Im Kim, Hyobin Seo, Sang Min Lee, Youkyung Lee, Min Kyung Lim, and Young Suk Park.
    • Research Institute and Hospital, National Cancer Center, Goyang-si, Gyeonggi-do 411-764, Republic of Korea. hpark@dreamwiz.com
    • Eur J Radiol. 2009 Dec 1;72(3):494-8.

    PurposeTo retrospectively compare immediate and long-term outcome of central venous infusion port inserted via right high versus low jugular vein approaches.Materials And MethodsThe study included 163 patients (125 women patients, 38 men patients; age range, 18-79 years; mean age, 53 years); 142 patients underwent port insertion with low jugular vein approach and 21 patients with high jugular vein approach. The causes of high jugular vein puncture were metastatic lymphadenopathy (n=7), operation scar (n=6), radiation scar (n=5), failure of low jugular vein puncture (n=2), and abnormal course of right subclavian artery (n=1). Medical records and radiologic studies were reviewed retrospectively to determine and compare the outcome and the occurrence of complication related to port.ResultsThe procedure-related complications were all minor (n=14, 8.6%) in both groups; hematoma (n=4, 2.8% in low jugular puncture group and n=1, 4.8% in high jugular puncture group, p=0.6295), air embolism (n=2, 1.4% in low jugular puncture group and n=0 in high jugular puncture group, p=0.5842) and minor bleeding (n=5, 3.5% in low jugular vein puncture group and n=2, 9.5% in high jugular vein puncture group, p=0.2054). The average length of follow-up was 431 days for low jugular vein puncture group and 284 days for high jugular vein puncture group. The difference between two groups was significant (p=0.0349). The reasons for catheter removal were patients' death (59 in low jugular puncture group and 14 in high jugular puncture group, p=0.0465), suspected infection (11 in low jugular vein puncture group and 2 in high jugular vein puncture group, p=0.8242), catheter occlusion (four in low jugular vein puncture group and one in high jugular vein puncture group, p=0.6583). The catheter tip migrated upward an average of 1.86 cm (range, -0.5 to 5.0 cm) in low jugular vein puncture group and 1.56 cm (range, 0-3.6 cm) in high jugular vein puncture group and there was no significant difference (p=0.4232).ConclusionsRight high jugular vein approach can be a feasible alternative to right low jugular vein approach.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…