English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Aim: Today, implantable central venous ports (ICVP) are increasingly used in oncology patients and provide easy vascular access for delivery of chemotherapy, other intravenous treatments, as fluids, blood products and parenteral nutrition solutions. In this study, we present our experience and comparison of efficacy and incidence of complications between subclavian versus jugular access in oncology patients and provide easy vascular access for delivery of chemotherapy. Material and Method: Three hundred ten implantable central venous ports (ICVP) were implanted via the subclavian vein (SV) in 145 patients (66 men, 79 women) with average age of 56.55 (18-86) and were implanted via the external jugular vein (EJV) in 165 patients (75 men, 90 women) with average age of 56.81 (19-81) between November 1,2006 and June 3, 2009. Results: There was no mortality caused by ICVP. As early complications, pneumothorax developed immediately after the procedure in 7 patients and arterial puncture in 34 patients. As late complications, infections developed in 10 patients, breakage of the catheter in one patient, malposition of catheter in one patient, jugular vein thrombosis in one patient. There was significant higher rate total implantation time in SV group (41610 catheter days) comparing with EJV group (23861 catheter days) ( p=0.000). Discussion: According to experience, there was no difference rates of complication of catheter between the two groups despite a longer stay in SV group (complication numbers 28 in SV group, 28 in EJV group). It should be noted that this study took place at a single centre experience with a limited number of cases included and more research needs to be done to determine new and better ways to long-term vascular access.

Comparison of Implantable Central Venous Ports: Subclavian Versus Juguler Access