Arm port vs chest port: a systematic review and meta-analysis

References

• Niederhuber JE, Ensminger W, Gyves JW, Liepman M, Doan K, Cozzi E. Totally implanted venous and arterial access system to replace external catheters in cancer treatment. Surgery. 1982;92:706–712.7123491
   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 trial examining the safety, efficacy, costs, and impact on quality of life. J Clin Oncol. 1999;17:1267. doi:10.1200/JCO.1999.17.4.126710561188
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Otsubo R, Hatachi T, Shibata K, et al. Evaluation of totally implantable venous access devices with the cephalic vein cut-down approach: usefulness of preoperative ultrasonography. J Surg Oncol. 2016;113:114–119. doi:10.1002/jso.2410026645575
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cavallaro G, Iorio O, Iossa A, et al. Surgical approach for totally implantable venous access devices (TIVADs). Consideration after 753 consecutive procedures. Am Surg. 2014;80:513–515.24887734
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kawamura J, Nagayama S, Nomura A, et al. Long-term outcomes of peripheral arm ports implanted in patients with colorectal cancer. Int J Clin Oncol. 2008;13:349–354. doi:10.1007/s10147-008-0766-218704637
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goltz JP, Scholl A, Ritter CO, Wittenberg G, Hahn D, Kickuth R. Peripherally placed totally implantable venous-access port systems of the forearm: clinical experience in 763 consecutive patients. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2010;33:1159–1167. doi:10.1007/s00270-010-9854-620414657
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Salem RR, Ward BA, Ravikumar TS. A new peripherally implanted subcutaneous permanent central venous access device for patients requiring chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol. 1993;11:2181–2185. doi:10.1200/JCO.1993.11.11.21818229132
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shiono M, Takahashi S, Takahashi M, Yamaguchi T, Ishioka C. Current situation regarding central venous port implantation procedures and complications a questionnaire based survey of 11693 implantations in Japan. Int J Clin Oncol. 2016;216:1172–1182. doi:10.1007/s10147-016-1003-z
   Google Scholar
• Angelo FAD, Ramacciato G, Aurello P, et al. Alternative insertion sites for permanent central venous access devices. Eur J Surg Oncol. 1997;23(6):547–549.9484928
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Goltz JP, Petritsch B, Kirchner J, Hahn D, Kickuth R. Percutaneous image guided implantation of totally implantable venous access ports in the forearm or the chest? A patients point of view. Support Care Cancer. 2013;21(2):505–510. doi:10.1007/s00520-012-1544-222829323
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klösges L, Meyer C, Boschewitz J, et al. Long term outcome of peripherally implanted venous access ports in the forearm in female cancer patients. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2015;38(3):657–664. doi:10.1007/s00270-014-0975-125209595
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goltz JP, Scholl A, Ritter CO, Wittenberg G, Hahn D, Kickuth R. Peripherally placed totally implantable venous-access port systems of the forearm: clinicalexperience in 763 consecutive patients. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2010;33(6):1159–1167. doi:10.1007/s00270-010-9854-620414657
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marcy PY, Magné N, Castadot P, et al. Is radiologic placement of an arm port mandatory in oncology patients? Analysis of a large bi-institutional experience. Cancer. 2007;110(10):2331–2338. doi:10.1002/cncr.2304017886248
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lin CH, Yu JC, Lee YT, et al. Conversion from cephalic vein to external jugular vein: success rate increased on totally implantable venous access ports with cut-down technique. Surg Innov. 2013;20:566–569. doi:10.1177/155335061347917823445713
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Di Carlo I, Pulvirenti E, Mannino M, Toro A. Increased use of percutaneous technique for totally implantable venous access devices. Is it real progress? A 27-year comprehensive review on early complications. Ann Surg Oncol. 2010;17:1649–1656. doi:10.1245/s10434-010-1005-420204533
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Di Carlo I, Barbagallo F, Toro A, et al. External jugular vein cutdown approach, as a useful alternative, supports the choice of the cephalic vein for totally implantable access device placement. Ann Surg Oncol. 2005;12:1–4. doi:10.1245/ASO.2005.10.90715827768
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stroup DF, Berlin JA, Morton SC, et al. Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: a proposal for reporting. Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) group. Jama. 2000;283:2008–2012.10789670
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, et al. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. Ann Intern Med. 2009;151(4):W65–W94.19622512
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McGee DC, Gould MK. Preventing complications of central venous catheterization. N Engl J Med. 2003;348:1123–1133. doi:10.1056/NEJMra01188312646670
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jung P, Ryu H, Jung JH, et al. Complications of central venous totally implantable access port: internal jugular versus subclavian access. Korean J Crit Care Med. 2015;30:13–17.
   Google Scholar
• Mermel LA, Allon M, Bouza E, et al. Clinical practice guidelines for the diagnosis and management of intravascular catheter-related infection: 2009 update by the Infectious Diseases Society of America. Clin Infect Dis. 2009;49:1–45. doi:10.1086/59937619489710
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Debourdeau P, Kassab Chahmi D, Le Gal G, et al. 2008 SOR guidelines for the prevention and treatment of thrombosis associated with central venous catheters in patients with cancer: report from the working group. Ann Oncol. 2009;20:1459–1471. doi:10.1093/annonc/mdp05219525362
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA. Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg. 2004;240:205–213. doi:10.1097/01.sla.0000133083.54934.ae15273542
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Higgins JPT, Green S(editors). Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions version 5.1.0. The Cochrane Collaboration 2011. Available from: http://www.cochrane-handbook.org/. updated 3 2011 Accessed October 12, 2018.
   Google Scholar
• Wells G, Shea B, O’Connell D, et al. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for Assessing the Quality of Nonrandomised Studies in Meta-Analyses. Ottawa Hospital Research Institute; 2010 Available from: http://www.ohri.ca/programs/clinical_epidemiology/oxford.asp. Accessed October 15, 2018.
   Google Scholar
• Hozo SP, Djulbegovic B, Hozo I. Estimating the mean and variance from the median, range, and the size of a sample. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2005;5:13. doi:10.1186/1471-2288-5-2715840177
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Olivo SA, Macedo LG, Gadotti IC, Fuentes J, Stanton T, Magee DJ. Scales to assess the quality of randomized controlled trials: a systematic review. Phys Ther. 2008;88:156–175. doi:10.2522/ptj.2007014718073267
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wu SY, Ling Q, Cao LH, et al. Real-time two-dimensional ultrasound guidance for central venous cannulation: a meta-analysis. Anesthesiology. 2013;118:361–375. doi:10.1097/ALN.0b013e31827bd17223249991
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Biffi R, Orsi F, Pozzi S, et al. Best choice of central venous insertion site for the prevention of catheter-related complications in adult patients who need cancer therapy a randomized trial. Ann Oncol. 2009;20(5):935–940. doi:10.1093/annonc/mdn70119179550
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• D’Angelo FA, Ramacciato G, Aurello P, et al. Prospective randomised study of cephalic vein cut-down versus subclavian vein puncture technique in the implantation of subcutaneous venous access devices. Chir Ital. 2002;54(4):495–500.12239758
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Iorio O, Gazzanelli S, D’Ermo G, et al. A prospective comparative evaluation on totally implantable venous access devices by external jugular vein versus cephalic vein cutdown. Am Surg. 2018;84(6):841–843.29981612
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alahyane A, Bounaim A, El Fahssi M. Complications of implanted venous sites for chemotherapy. J Afr Du Cancer. 2010;2(4):240–244. doi:10.1007/s12558-010-0115-z
   Google Scholar
• Akahane A, Sone M, Ehara S, Kato K, Tanaka R, Nakasato T. Subclavian vein versus arm vein for totally implantable central venous port for patients with head and neck cancer a retrospective comparative analysis. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2011;34(6):1222–1229. doi:10.1007/s00270-010-0051-421127864
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goltz JP, Noack C, Petritsch B, Kirchner J, Hahn D, Kickuth R. Totally implantable venous power ports of the forearm and the chest: initial clinical experiencewith port devices approved for high-pressure injections. Br J Radiol. 2012;85(1019):e966–e972. doi:10.1259/bjr/3322434122674705
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuriakose P, Colon-Otero G, Paz-Fumagalli R. Risk of deep venous thrombosis associated with chest versus arm central venous subcutaneous port catheters a 5-year single-institution retrospective study. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2002;13:179–184.11830624
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li Y, Cai Y, Gan X, et al. Application and comparison of different implanted ports in malignant tumor patients. World J Surg Oncol. 2016;14(1):251. doi:10.1186/s12957-016-1002-627664131
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Marcy PY, Magné 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. doi:10.1007/s10549-005-1711-y15980992
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marcy PY, Chamorey E, Amoretti N, et al. A comparison between distal and proximal port device insertion in head and neck cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2008;34(11):1262–1269. doi:10.1016/j.ejso.2007.09.01117981432
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Matiotti-Neto M, Eskander MF, Tabatabaie O, et al. Percutaneous versus cut-down technique for indwelling port placement. Am Surg. 2017;83(12):1336–1342.29336750
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shiono M, Takahashi S, Kakudo Y, et al. Upper arm central venous port implantation A 6-year single institutional retrospective analysis and pictorial essay of procedures for insertion. PLoS One. 2014;9(3):e91335. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.009133524614412
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wan X, Wang W, Liu J, et al. Estimating the sample mean and standard deviation from the sample size, median, range and/or interquartile range. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2014;14:135. doi:10.1186/1471-2288-14-13525524443
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Orci LA, Meier RP, Morel P, et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of percutaneous subclavian vein puncture versus surgical venous cutdown for the insertion of a totally implantable venous access device. Br J Surg. 2014;101:8–16. doi:10.1002/bjs.927624276950
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Knebel P, Fischer L, Huesing J, Hennes R, Büchler MW, Seiler CM. Randomized clinical trial of a modified Seldinger technique for open central venous cannulation for implantable access devices. Br J Surg. 2009;96:159–165. doi:10.1002/bjs.645719160366
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koketsu S, Samesima S, Yoneyama S, et al. Outcome of cephalic vein cut-down approach: a safe and feasible approach for totally implantable venous access device placement. Oncol Lett. 2010;1(6):1029–1031. doi:10.3892/ol.2010.18922870107
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lefrant JY, Muller L, De La Coussaye JE, et al. Risk factors of failure and immediate complication of subclavian vein catheterization in critically ill patients. Intensive Care Med. 2002;28(8):1036–1041. doi:10.1007/s00134-002-1364-912185422
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marcy PY, Schiappa R, Ferrero JM, et al. Patient satisfaction and acceptance of their totally implanted central venous catheter: a French prospective multicenter study. J Vasc Access. 2017;18(5):390–395. doi:10.5301/jva.500074428731491
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pronovost P, Needham D, Berenholtz S, et al. An intervention to decrease catheter-related bloodstream infections in the ICU. N Engl J Med. 2006;355:2725–2732. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa06111517192537
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chaukiyal P, Nautiyal A, Radhakrishnan S, et al. Thromboprophylaxis in cancer patients with central venous catheters. A systematic review and meta-analysis. Thromb Haemost. 2008;99:38–43. doi:10.1160/TH07-07-044618217132
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Debourdeau P, Farge D, Beckers M, et al. International clinical practice guidelines for the treatment and prophylaxis of thrombosis associated with central venous catheters in patients with cancer. Thromb Haemost. 2013;11:71–80. doi:10.1111/jth.12071
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kefeli U, Dane F, Yumuk PF, et al. Prolonged interval in prophylactic heparin flushing for maintenance of subcutaneous implanted port care in patients with cancer. Eur J Cancer Care (Engl). 2009;18:191–194. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2354.2008.00973.x19267736
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar