Capaccioli L, Nistri M, Distante V, Rontini M, Manetti A, Stecco A
Dipartimento di Fisiopatologia Clinica, Università degli Studi, Firenze.
Radiol Med. 1998 Oct;96(4):369-74.
Anticancer chemotherapy causes irreversible damage to the endothelial wall of small vessels. This is the reason why long-term (more than 3 months) central venous devices are essential to administer chemotherapy drugs to cancer patients and antibiotics for chronic or severe infections and in patients requiring long-term parenteral nutrition. We report our experience with the percutaneous implantation of central venous devices in a radiology department.
March, 1993, to August, 1997, eighty-seven consecutive patients (26 men and 61 women, mean age: 55 years) were examined. The indications for central venous catheter placement included anticancer chemotherapy in 82 cancer patients, repeated blood transfusion in one patient with bone marrow aplasia and nutritional support in four cancer patients. Eighty-four central venous devices (75 totally subcutaneous systems--Port-a-cath Dome--, and 9 partially tunneled catheters--Groshong) were inserted. The average follow-up was 6.5 months (range: 1-18). All procedures were performed in the radiology department and venous access was achieved with fluoroscopy using the Seldinger technique. Chest radiography with the patient standing was routinely performed after the procedure and repeated the day after to assess the catheter position and the presence of pneumothorax. The venous catheters were placed in the subclavian vein in 68 cases (12 in the right side and 56 in the left side), internal jugular vein in 12 cases (9 in the right side and 3 in the left side) and right femoral vein in 4 cases. We prefer the subclavian vein (80.9%) for better cosmetic results, wider catheter angulation and easier fixation to the deep plane.
The first access failed in 6 cases (6.8%). A pneumothorax occurred in 4 patients (4.7%) and late complications were seen in 15 patients (17.8%) after a mean of 15.7 weeks (range: 2-48). Catheter-related infections developed in 6 patients (7.1%) after a mean of 20 weeks (range: 5-48). The microorganisms cultured from these catheters was the Staphylococcus epidermidis. After two weeks' specific antibiotic therapy, all the devices were removed. Deep venous thrombosis occurred only in one patient after 10 months and was successfully treated with direct thrombolytic infusion. The catheter was displaced in the right atrium in two patients after 11 and 12 weeks, respectively: both catheters were removed by transfemoral catheterization.
The percutaneous implantation of--long-term central venous devices is a safe and tolerable procedure. In our experience, the radiology-assisted placement of these devices offers many advantages over surgical implantation. In particular, fluoroscopy allows direct visualization of the catheter position while insertion and positioning are essentially "blind" at surgery, which complicates venous access and increases the risk of catheter malpositioning. Radiologic follow-up is also useful to depict and correct complications.
抗癌化疗会对小血管的内皮壁造成不可逆的损伤。这就是长期(超过3个月)中心静脉置管对于给癌症患者输注化疗药物、给慢性或严重感染患者使用抗生素以及给需要长期肠外营养的患者进行营养支持至关重要的原因。我们报告在放射科经皮植入中心静脉置管的经验。
1993年3月至1997年8月,对87例连续患者(26例男性和61例女性,平均年龄:55岁)进行了检查。中心静脉导管置入的适应证包括82例癌症患者的抗癌化疗、1例骨髓再生障碍患者的反复输血以及4例癌症患者的营养支持。共插入84根中心静脉置管(75根完全皮下系统——植入式静脉输液港,9根部分隧道式导管——Groshong导管)。平均随访时间为6.5个月(范围:1 - 18个月)。所有操作均在放射科进行,采用Seldinger技术在透视引导下建立静脉通路。术后常规让患者站立位行胸部X线检查,并于次日复查以评估导管位置及有无气胸。68例静脉导管置于锁骨下静脉(右侧12例,左侧56例),12例置于颈内静脉(右侧9例,左侧3例),4例置于右股静脉。我们更倾向于选择锁骨下静脉(80.9%),因为其美容效果更好、导管角度更宽且更容易固定于深部平面。
首次穿刺失败6例(6.8%)。4例患者发生气胸(4.7%),15例患者出现晚期并发症(17.8%),平均发生时间为15.7周(范围:2 - 48周)。6例患者发生导管相关感染(7.1%),平均发生时间为20周(范围:5 - 48周)。从这些导管培养出的微生物为表皮葡萄球菌。经过两周的特异性抗生素治疗后,所有置管均被拔除。仅1例患者在10个月后发生深静脉血栓,经直接溶栓输注成功治疗。2例患者分别在11周和12周后导管移位至右心房:两根导管均通过经股动脉导管插入术拔除。
经皮植入长期中心静脉置管是一种安全且可耐受的操作。根据我们的经验,放射科辅助放置这些置管比手术植入具有许多优势。特别是,透视可在插入和定位过程中直接观察导管位置,而手术时插入和定位基本上是“盲目”的,这会使静脉通路复杂化并增加导管位置不当的风险。放射学随访对于发现和纠正并发症也很有用。