Long-Term Management of Vascular Access Ports in Nonhuman Primates Used in Preclinical Efficacy and Tolerability Studies

References

• Vescia S, Baumgärtner A, Jacobs V, Kiechle-Bahat M, Rody A, Loibl S. Management of venous port systems in oncology: a review of current evidence. Ann Oncol. 2008;19(1):9–15.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bland KI, Woodcock T. Totally implantable venous access system for cyclic administration of cytotoxic chemotherapy. Am J Surg. 1984;147(6):815–816.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bothe A, Piccione W, Ambrosino JJ, Benotti PN, Lokich JJ. Implantable central venous access system. Am J Surg. 1984;147(4):565–569.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Niederhuber J, Ensminger W, Gyves J, Liepman M, Doan K, Cozzi E. Totally implanted venous and arterial access system to replace external catheters in cancer treatment. Surgery. 1982;92(4):706–712.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O'grady NP, Alexander M, Dellinger EP, et al. Guidelines for the prevention of intravascular catheter–related infections. Clin Infect Dis. 2002;35(11):1281–1307.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gurkan S, Seber S, Gur O, Yetisyigit T, Okan Donbaloglu M, Ozkaramanli Gur D. Retrospective evaluation of totally implantable venous access port devices: early and late complications. J BUON. 2015;20(1):338–345.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kakkos A, Bresson L, Hudry D, et al. Complication-related removal of totally implantable venous access port systems: does the interval between placement and first use and the neutropenia-inducing potential of chemotherapy regimens influence their incidence? A four-year prospective study of 4045 patients. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2017;43(4):689–695.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Karanlik H, Odabas H, Yildirim I, et al. Is there any effect of first-day usage of a totally implantable venous access device on complications? Int J Clin Oncol. 2015;20(6):1057–1062.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kılıç S, Soyer T, Karnak İ, Çiftçi AÖ, Tanyel FC, Şenocak ME. Evaluation of the removal reasons of totally implantable venous devices in children: a retrospective study. Turk J Pediatr. 2016;58(2):187–194.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ma LI, Liu Y, Wang J, Chang Y, Yu L, Geng C. Totally implantable venous access port systems and associated complications: a single-institution retrospective analysis of 2,996 breast cancer patients. Mol Clin Oncol. 2016;4(3):456–460.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tabatabaie O, Kasumova GG, Eskander MF, Critchlow JF, Tawa NE, Tseng JF. Totally implantable venous access devices: a review of complications and management strategies. Am J Clin Oncol. 2017;40(1):94–105.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Viana Taveira MR, Lima LS, de Araujo CC, de Mello MJ. Risk factors for central line-associated bloodstream infection in pediatric oncology patients with a totally implantable venous access port: a cohort study. Pediatr Blood Cancer. 2017;64(2):336–342.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Voog E, Campion L, Du Rusquec P, et al. Totally implantable venous access ports: a prospective long-term study of early and late complications in adult patients with cancer. Support Care Cancer. 2018;26(1):81–89.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang YC, Lin PL, Chou WH, Lin CP, Huang CH. Long-term outcomes of totally implantable venous access devices. Support Care Cancer. 2017;25(7):2049–2054.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zerati AE, Figueredo TR, de Moraes RD, et al. Risk factors for infectious and noninfectious complications of totally implantable venous catheters in cancer patients. J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord. 2016;4(2):200–205.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Swindle MM, Nolan T, Jacobson A, Wolf P, Dalton MJ, Smith AC. Vascular access port (VAP) usage in large animal species. Contemp Top Lab Anim Sci. 2005;44(3):7–17.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Morrison JA, Lauer SK, Baldwin CJ, et al. Evaluation of the use of subcutaneous implantable vascular access ports in feline blood donors. J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2007;230(6):855–861.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Henry CJ, Russell LE, Tyler JW, et al. Comparison of hematologic and biochemical values for blood samples obtained via jugular venipuncture and via vascular access ports in cats. J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2002;220(4):482–485.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chuang M, Orvieto M, Laven B, et al. Comparison of external catheters with subcutaneous vascular access ports for chronic vascular access in a porcine model. Contemp Top Lab Anim Sci. 2005;44(2):24–27.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wijkstrom M, Kenyon NS, Kirchhof N, et al. Islet allograft survival in nonhuman primates immunosuppressed with basiliximab, RAD, and FTY7201. Transplantation. 2004;77(6):827–835.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Theriault BR, Thistlethwaite J, Jr, Levisetti MG, et al. Induction, maintenance, and reversal of streptozotocin-induced insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus in the juvenile cynomolgus monkey (Macaca fascilularis) 1. Transplantation. 1999;68(3):331–337.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levisetti MG, Padrid P, Szot G, et al. Immunosuppressive effects of human CTLA4Ig in a non-human primate model of allogeneic pancreatic islet transplantation. J Immunol. 1997;159(11):5187–5191.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hering BJ, Wijkstrom M, Graham ML, et al. Prolonged diabetes reversal after intraportal xenotransplantation of wild-type porcine islets in immunosuppressed nonhuman primates. Nat Med. 2006;12(3):301.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Graham ML, Prescott MJ. The multifactorial role of the 3Rs in shifting the harm-benefit analysis in animal models of disease. Eur J Pharmacol. 2015;759:19–29.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Craig D, Trost J, Talley W. A surgical procedure for implantation of a chronic indwelling jugular catheter in the monkey. Lab Anim Care. 1969;19(2):237
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Fitzgerald A, Dillon L, Altrogge D, Bleavins M, Breider M. Use of subcutaneous vascular access ports in common marmosets (Callithrix jacchus). Contemporary Topics Lab Animal Sci (USA). 1996; 46(5):539–544.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Graham ML, Rieke EF, Wijkstrom M, et al. Risk factors associated with surgical site infection and the development of short-term complications in macaques undergoing indwelling vascular access port placement. J Med Primatol. 2008;37(4):202–209.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wojnicki F, Bacher JD, Glowa JR. Use of subcutaneous vascular access ports in rhesus monkeys. Lab Anim Sci. 1994;44(5):491–494.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Graham ML, Rieke EF, Dunning M, et al. A novel alternative placement site and technique for totally implantable vascular access ports in non-human primates. J Med Primatol. 2009;38(3):204–212.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Graham ML, Mutch LA, Rieke EF, et al. Refinement of vascular access port placement in nonhuman primates: complication rates and outcomes. Comp Med. 2010;60(6):479–485.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Graham ML, Mutch LA, Rieke EF, et al. Long-term hepatic vascular access in the nonhuman primate for recurrent portal vein infusion. J Invest Surg. 2011;24(2):59–66.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johansson E, Engervall P, Björvell H, Hast R, Björkholm M. Patients' perceptions of having a central venous catheter or a totally implantable subcutaneous port system-results from a randomised study in acute leukaemia. Support Care Cancer. 2009;17(2):137–143.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ignatov A, Hoffman O, Smith B, et al. An 11-year retrospective study of totally implanted central venous access ports: complications and patient satisfaction. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2009;35(3):241–246.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marcy P-Y, Magne N, Castadot P, et al. Radiological and surgical placement of port devices: a 4-year institutional analysis of procedure performance, quality of life and cost in breast cancer patients. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2005;92(1):61–67.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bow EJ, Kilpatrick MG, Clinch JJ. Totally implantable venous access ports systems for patients receiving chemotherapy for solid tissue malignancies: a randomized controlled clinical trial examining the safety, efficacy, costs, and impact on quality of life. J Clin Oncol. 1999;17(4):1267.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wall HS, Worthman C, Else JG. Effects of ketamine anaesthesia, stress and repeated bleeding on the haematology of vervet monkeys. Lab Anim. 1985;19(2):138–144.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reinhardt V, Reinhardt A. Blood collection procedure of laboratory primates: a neglected variable in biomedical research. J Appl Animal Welfare Sci. 2000;3(4):321–333.
   Google Scholar
• Reinhardt V. Working with rather than against macaques during blood collection. J Appl Anim Welf Sci. 2003;6(3):189–197.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Morrow-Tesch JL, McGlone JJ, Norman RL. Consequences of restraint stress on natural killer cell activity, behavior, and hormone levels in rhesus macaques (Macaca mulatta). Psychoneuroendocrinology. 1993;18(5-6):383–395.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lemieux AM, Coe CL, Ershler WB, Karaszewski JW. Surgical and psychological stressors differentially affect cytolytic responses in the rhesus monkey. Brain Behav Immun. 1996;10(1):27–43.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kemnitz JW, Kraemer GW. Assessment of glucoregulation in Rhesus-Monkeys sedated with ketamine. Am J Primatol. 1982;3(1-4):201–210.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hou FY, Coe CL, Erickson C. Psychological disturbance differentially alters CD4+ and CD8+ leukocytes in the blood and intrathecal compartments. J Neuroimmunol. 1996;68(1-2):13–18.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crockett CM, Bowers CL, Sackett GP, Bowden DM. Urinary cortisol responses of longtailed macaques to 5 cage sizes, tethering, sedation, and room change. Am J Primatol. 1993;30(1):55–74.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Streett J, Jonas A. Differential effects of chemical and physical restraint on carbohydrate tolerance testing in nonhuman primates. Lab Anim Sci. 1982;32(3):263–266.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Turner PV, Pekow C, Vasbinder MA, Brabb T. Administration of substances to laboratory animals: equipment considerations, vehicle selection, and solute preparation. J Am Assoc Lab Animal Sci. 2011;50(5):614–627.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Graham ML, Schuurman H-J. Pancreatic islet xenotransplantation. Drug Discovery Today: Disease Models; 2017.
   Google Scholar
• Graham ML, Rieke EF, Mutch LA, et al. Successful implementation of cooperative handling eliminates the need for restraint in a complex non-human primate disease model. J Med Primatol. 2012;41(2):89–106.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• United States. Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service. issuing b. Animal Welfare Act and animal welfare regulations. Animal welfare regulations. Washington, DC: United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.
   Google Scholar
• Council NR. Guide for the care and use of laboratory animals: Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2010.
   Google Scholar
• Graham ML. Positive reinforcement training and research. In: Handbook of primate behavioral management. Boca Rotan, FL: CRC Press; 2017.
   Google Scholar
• Control CfD, Prevention. Surgical site infection event SSIS. Guidelines and procedures for monitoring SSI; 2014.
   Google Scholar
• Barrios CH, Zuke JE, Blaes B, Hirsch JD, Lyss AP. Evaluation of an implantable venous access system in a general oncology population. Oncology. 1992;49(6):474–478.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Milani A, Mazzocco K, Gandini S, et al. Incidence and determinants of port occlusions in cancer outpatients: a prospective cohort study. Cancer Nurs. 2017;40(2):102–107.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pittiruti M, Bertoglio S, Scoppettuolo G, et al. Evidence-based criteria for the choice and the clinical use of the most appropriate lock solutions for central venous catheters (excluding dialysis catheters): a GAVeCeLT consensus. J Vasc Access. 2016;17(6):453–464.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goossens GA. Flushing and locking of venous catheters: available evidence and evidence deficit. Nurs Res Pract. 2015;2015:1.
   Google Scholar
• Olthof ED, Versleijen MW, Huisman-de Waal G, Feuth T, Kievit W, Wanten GJ. Taurolidine lock is superior to heparin lock in the prevention of catheter related bloodstream infections and occlusions. PLoS One. 2014;9(11):e111216
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dillon PW, Jones GR, Bagnall-Reeb HA, Buckley JD, Wiener ES, Haase GM. Prophylactic urokinase in the management of long-term venous access devices in children: a Children's Oncology Group study. JCO. 2004;22(13):2718–2723.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ray CE, Jr, Shenoy SS, McCarthy PL, Broderick KA, Kaufman JA. Weekly prophylactic urokinase instillation in tunneled central venous access devices. J Vasc Intervent Radiol. 1999;10(10):1330–1334.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• An H, Ryu CG, Jung EJ, et al. Insertion of totally implantable central venous access devices by surgeons. Ann Coloproctol. 2015;31(2):63–67.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Esfahani H, Ghorbanpor M, Tanasan A. Implantable port devices, complications and outcome in pediatric cancer, a retrospective study. Iran J Ped Hematol Oncol. 2016;6(1):1–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ji L, Yang J, Miao J, Shao Q, Cao Y, Li H. Infections related to totally implantable venous-access ports: long-term experience in one center. Cell Biochem Biophys. 2015;72(1):235–240.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bratzler DW, Dellinger EP, Olsen KM, et al. Clinical practice guidelines for antimicrobial prophylaxis in surgery. Surg Infect. 2013;14(1):73–156.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson E, Babb J, Sridhar D. Routine antibiotic prophylaxis for totally implantable venous access device placement: meta-analysis of 2,154 patients. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2016;27(3):339–343. quiz 44.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Venkatesan AM, Kundu S, Sacks D, et al. Practice guideline for adult antibiotic prophylaxis during vascular and interventional radiology procedures. J Vasc Intervent Radiol. 2010;21(11):1611–1630.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dumichen MJ, Seeger K, Lode HN, et al. Randomized controlled trial of taurolidine citrate versus heparin as catheter lock solution in paediatric patients with haematological malignancies. J Hosp Infect. 2012;80(4):304–309.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ince E, Oğuzkurt P, Temiz A, et al. Complications of total implantable access ports and efficacy of Taurolidine-citrate lock solution against catheter-related infections. Afr J Paediatr Surg. 2014;11(2):138–142.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Simon A, Ammann RA, Wiszniewsky G, Bode U, Fleischhack G, Besuden MM. Taurolidine-citrate lock solution (TauroLock) significantly reduces CVAD-associated Gram positive infections in pediatric cancer patients. BMC Infect Dis. 2008;8(1):102.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gebarski SS, Gebarski KS. Chemotherapy port ‘Twiddler's syndrome’. A need for preinjection radiography.. Cancer 1984;54(1):38–39.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Landi M, Schantz J, Jenkins E, Warnick C, Kissinger J. ICLAS proceedings: a survey of vascular access portTM infection in cynomolgus monkeys (Macaca fascicularis). Scand J Lab Animal Sci Suppl (Denmark). 1996;27(Suppl): 91–96.
   Google Scholar