Radiology
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Morris, S. L.
Right arrow Articles by Mauro, M. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Morris, S. L.
Right arrow Articles by Mauro, M. A.

Radiology, Vol 184, 149-151, Copyright © 1992 by Radiological Society of North America


ARTICLES

Radiology-assisted placement of implantable subcutaneous infusion ports for long-term venous access

SL Morris, PF Jaques and MA Mauro
Department of Radiology, University of North Carolina Hospitals, Chapel Hill 27510.

Implantable infusion port devices are generally placed surgically. A technique for radiology-guided placement in adults is described, and the experience with 103 attempted port placements between June 1989 and October 1991 is analyzed. Placements were successful in 102 attempts (99%). Minor procedural difficulties occurred in six patients (5.9%). One major procedural complication (large hematoma) precluded port placement. Two patients were lost to follow-up after uncomplicated placements. There were four (4.0% of 100 patients) minor late complications. Major late complications requiring port removal occurred in 13 (13.0%): five suspected catheter-related infections, four catheter-related venous thromboses refractory to thrombolysis, and one each of wound dehiscence, formation of hematoma near the port, extraluminal migration of the catheter, and poor blood return. With a cumulative follow-up of 15,880 days (43.5 patient-years) available, a rate of major complications of 13.6%, or 0.86% per 1,000 access days, is comparable to the rates of large surgical series. Radiology-guided placement of infusion ports is safe and may offer advantages over surgical implantation.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
B. Funaki
Central Venous Access: A Primer for the Diagnostic Radiologist
Am. J. Roentgenol., August 1, 2002; 179(2): 309 - 318.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Arch Intern MedHome page
D. Kuizon, S. M. Gordon, and B. L. Dolmatch
Single-Lumen Subcutaneous Ports Inserted by Interventional Radiologists in Patients Undergoing Chemotherapy: Incidence of Infection and Outcome of Attempted Catheter Salvage
Arch Intern Med, February 12, 2001; 161(3): 406 - 410.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
RADIOLOGY RADIOGRAPHICS RSNA JOURNALS ONLINE
Copyright © 1992 by the Radiological Society of North America.