Suppr超能文献

疑似系统相关机械并发症患者中,上臂中心静脉端口与胸壁中心静脉端口血流确认研究的有效性。

Effectiveness of a flow confirmation study of a central venous port of the upper arm versus the chest wall in patients with suspected system-related mechanical complications.

作者信息

Tokue Hiroyuki, Tokue Azusa, Tsushima Yoshito

机构信息

Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Gunma University Hospital, 3-39-22 Showa-machi, Maebashi, Gunma, 371-8511, Japan.

出版信息

World J Surg Oncol. 2022 Mar 22;20(1):91. doi: 10.1186/s12957-022-02565-7.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

If mechanical complications associated with a central venous port (CVP) system are suspected, evaluation with a flow confirmation study (FCS) using fluorescence fluoroscopy or digital subtraction angiography should be performed. Evaluations of mechanical complications related to CVP of the chest wall using FCS performed via the subclavian vein have been reported. However, the delayed complications of a CVP placed in the upper arm have not been sufficiently evaluated in a large population. We evaluated the effectiveness of FCS of CVPs implanted following percutaneous cannulation of the subclavian (chest wall group) or brachial (upper arm group) vein.

METHODS

A CVP was implanted in patients with advanced cancer requiring chemotherapy. FCS was performed if there were complaints suggestive of CVP dysfunction when initiating chemotherapy.

RESULTS

CVPs were placed in the brachial vein in 390 patients and in the subclavian vein in 800 patients. FCS was performed in 26/390 (6.7%) patients in the upper arm group and 40/800 (5.0%) patients in the chest wall group. The clinical characteristics of the patients were similar in both groups. The duration of CVP implantation until FCS was significantly shorter in the upper arm group (136 ± 96.6 vs. 284 ± 260, p = 0.022). After FCS, the incidence of CVP removal/reimplantation being deemed unnecessary was higher in the upper arm group (21/26 [80.8%] vs. 26/40 [65.0%], p = 0.27). In the upper arm group, no cases of catheter kinking or catheter-related injury were observed, and the incidence of temporary obstruction because of blood clots that could be continued using CVP was significantly higher than that in the chest wall group (10/26 [38.5%] vs. 4/40 [10.0%], p = 0.012).

CONCLUSIONS

FCS was effective in evaluating CVP system-related mechanical complications and deciding whether removal and reimplantation were required in both groups.

摘要

背景

如果怀疑中心静脉置管(CVP)系统存在机械并发症,应使用荧光透视或数字减影血管造影进行血流确认研究(FCS)评估。已有报道通过锁骨下静脉进行FCS评估胸壁CVP相关的机械并发症。然而,上臂置入CVP的延迟并发症在大量人群中尚未得到充分评估。我们评估了经皮穿刺锁骨下静脉(胸壁组)或肱静脉(上臂组)后置入CVP的FCS效果。

方法

为需要化疗的晚期癌症患者置入CVP。开始化疗时若有提示CVP功能障碍的主诉,则进行FCS。

结果

390例患者的CVP置入肱静脉,800例患者的CVP置入锁骨下静脉。上臂组26/390(6.7%)例患者和胸壁组40/800(5.0%)例患者进行了FCS。两组患者的临床特征相似。上臂组直至FCS时CVP植入的持续时间显著短于胸壁组(136±96.6 vs. 284±260,p = 0.022)。FCS后,上臂组认为无需移除/重新植入CVP的发生率更高(21/26 [80.8%] vs. 26/40 [65.0%],p = 0.27)。在上臂组,未观察到导管扭结或导管相关损伤的病例,因血凝块导致的可继续使用CVP的临时阻塞发生率显著高于胸壁组(10/26 [38.5%] vs. 4/40 [10.0%],p = 0.012)。

结论

FCS在评估两组中与CVP系统相关的机械并发症以及决定是否需要移除和重新植入方面是有效的。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8b1c/8939116/3aa19836a8cc/12957_2022_2565_Fig1_HTML.jpg

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验