Tunneled central venous catheters in a gynecologic oncology service: operative and short-term complications

• Published in: European journal of gynaecological oncology Vol. 29; no. 2; p. 141
• Main Authors: Geisler, J P, Buller, R E, Manahan, K J
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Italy 2008
• Subjects: Catheterization, Central Venous - adverse effects; Catheterization, Central Venous - methods; Female; Genital Neoplasms, Female - complications; Genital Neoplasms, Female - therapy; Humans; Jugular Veins; Retrospective Studies; Subclavian Vein; Time; Venous Cutdown - adverse effects
• ISSN: 0392-2936

To determine the difference in the immediate complication rate between placement of long-term central venous catheters (LTCVCs) by the percutaneous versus jugular venous cutdown method. Case lists were examined to determine the number of LTCVCs placed during the designated time period. Medical records, operative reports, and chest roentgenograms were examined to extract pertinent information. Immediate complications included complications occurring in the operating room until 30 days postoperatively. Complications included misplacement of the catheter requiring an adjustment or a repeat procedure, pneumothorax, hydrothorax, or hemothorax, operative site or tunnel infection, and line migration requiring removal. Five hundred and one patients had LTCVCs placed during the period of this study. This included 399 totally implantable venous access devices (TIVADs) and 102 free access venous access devices (FAVADs) with 163 placed percutaneously into subclavian veins and 338 placed by cutdown into jugular veins. There was a significant increased risk in the overall immediate complication rate for the percutaneous placement compared to venous cutdown (p < 0.001). Also, pneumothorax was more common with the percutaneous approach compared to the venous cutdown approach (p < 0.001). Immediate complications, especially pneumothorax, were more common when placing catheters by the percutaneous approach as compared to the venous cutdown approach.