Five Years of Experience in Patients Receiving Home Nutrition Support with the Implanted Reservoir: A Comparison with the External Catheter

This study examines 5 years (1983–1988) of home parenteral nutrition (HPN) experience in 27 patients using the implanted reservoir for venous access. Their catheter‐related complications are compared to two control populations using the external catheter. Group I compares the 46 patients who all started HPN in the same 5‐year period, group II compares 17 patients with experience of both types of venous access. For the entire 58 patients the average infusion time was 22 months (1 month‐8.2 yr) and the average complication rate was about one complication every 2 years. Analyzing the separate groups however, group I implanted reservoir patients did better than those with the external catheter (p < 0.05) and group II external catheter patients did better than those with the implanted reservoir (p < 0.05). A possible explanation for this discrepancy is the greater medical competence of group I patients selecting the reservoir. The data show a clear separation of patients into those who have minimal complications with either device and others who have several complications with both. Two‐thirds of the complications were infectious, one third mechanical. The infectious complications were similar with both catheters; clotting was more common with the external catheter and skin erosion was seen only with the reservoir. Eighty % of patients with experience with both type of venous access preferred the implanted reservoir. (Journal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition 13: 478–483, 1989)