Suppr超能文献

经颈静脉植入式端口导管的替代通路部位:一家三甲医疗机构的经验。

Alternate Cervical Venous Access Sites for Implantable Port Catheters: Experience at a Single Quaternary Care Institution.

机构信息

Davis Medical Center. Department of Radiology, University of California, 4860 Y Street, Suite 3100, Sacramento, CA, 95817, USA.

Davis Medical Center, Clinical and Translational Science Center, University of California, Sacramento, CA, USA.

出版信息

Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2023 Jan;46(1):43-48. doi: 10.1007/s00270-022-03306-9. Epub 2022 Dec 12.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

Clinical outcomes of implantable port catheters (IPCs) placed via alternative veins such as the external jugular and cervical collaterals have not been well established. This investigation evaluates the short- and long-term outcomes of IPCs inserted via alternate cervical veins (ACV) compared to traditionally inserted IPCs via the internal jugular vein (IJV).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 24 patients who received an IPC between 2010 and 2020 via an ACV-defined as the external jugular vein, superficial cervical vein, or unnamed collateral veins-were identified. Based on power analysis, a matched control group of 72 patients who received IPCs via the IJV was identified. Non-inferiority analysis for port complications was performed between the two groups based on the selected non-inferiority margin of 20%. Secondary end points included complication-free survival and comparison of complications by the time at which they occurred.

RESULTS

ACV access was non-inferior to traditional access for overall complications. Alternate access resulted in fewer complications than traditional access with an estimated reduction of - 7.0% [95% CI - 23.6%, 39.7%]. There was no significant difference in peri-procedural and post-procedural complications between the two groups. Complication-free survival was also equivalent between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

IPC placement via ACVs was non-inferior to IPCs placed via traditional access through the IJV. When abnormal pathology obviates the use of IJV access, other cervical veins may be considered prior to seeking alternate locations such as femoral, translumbar, inferior vena cava, and hepatic veins.

摘要

简介

通过外部颈静脉和颈侧支等替代静脉放置植入式端口导管(IPC)的临床结果尚未得到很好的确定。本研究评估了通过替代颈静脉(ACV)插入 IPC 与通过传统颈内静脉(IJV)插入 IPC 的短期和长期结果。

材料和方法

共确定了 24 例在 2010 年至 2020 年间通过 ACV 接受 IPC 的患者,ACV 定义为颈外静脉、颈浅静脉或无名侧支静脉。根据功效分析,确定了 72 例通过 IJV 接受 IPC 的匹配对照组。根据选定的 20%非劣效性边界,对两组之间的端口并发症进行非劣效性分析。次要终点包括无并发症生存率和按并发症发生时间比较并发症。

结果

ACV 通路在总体并发症方面与传统通路无差异。替代通路的并发症比传统通路少,估计减少了-7.0%[95%CI-23.6%,39.7%]。两组之间在围手术期和术后并发症方面没有显著差异。两组之间无并发症生存率也相当。

结论

通过 ACV 放置 IPC 与通过 IJV 放置传统 IPC 无差异。当异常病理学排除 IJV 通路的使用时,在寻求股静脉、经皮、下腔静脉和肝静脉等替代位置之前,可以考虑其他颈静脉。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c88f/9810555/e8f546def32c/270_2022_3306_Fig1_HTML.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验