Purpose: To compare the efficacy and safety of right internal jugular vein (IJV) approach and right innominate vein (INV) approach for US-guided totally implantable venous access devices (TIVADs), and to explore the advantages and disadvantages of the two approaches. Methods: Six hundred and nineteen adult patients had long-term infusion and chemotherapy needs and inconvenience of peripheral venous infusion. Right INV approach was used to implant 339 cases of TIVADs, and right IJV approach was used to implant 280 cases of TIVADs. The success rate of one-time catheterization and the incidence of complications in the two groups were retrospectively analyzed. Results: All patients were successfully implanted in TIVAD. The success rates of one-time puncture in INV group and IJV approach group were 98.53% (334/339) and 95.36% (267/280), respectively. There was significant difference between the two groups (P=0.020). The incidence of perioperative complications was 1.18% (4/339) and the long-term complications was 3.54% (12/339) in the right INV group. The incidence of perioperative complications was 1.43% (4/280) and the long-term complications was 3.93% (11/280) in the right INV group. There was no significant difference in the incidence of complications between the two groups (P=0.785,P=0.799, respectively). Conclusions: US-guided TIVADs via the right INV approach and the right IJV approach are both safe and reliable. The right INV approach improves the one-time puncture success rate, as long as the technique is properly operated, serious complications rarely occur.
Purpose: To compare the efficacy and safety of right internal jugular vein (IJV) approach and right innominate vein (INV) approach for US-guided totally implantable venous access devices (TIVADs), and to explore the advantages and disadvantages of the two approaches. Methods: Six hundred and nineteen adult patients had long-term infusion and chemotherapy needs and inconvenience of peripheral venous infusion. Right INV approach was used to implant 339 cases of TIVADs, and right IJV approach was used to implant 280 cases of TIVADs. The success rate of one-time catheterization and the incidence of complications in the two groups were retrospectively analyzed. Results: All patients were successfully implanted in TIVAD. The success rates of one-time puncture in INV group and IJV approach group were 98.53% (334/339) and 95.36% (267/280), respectively. There was significant difference between the two groups (P=0.020). The incidence of perioperative complications was 1.18% (4/339) and the long-term complications was 3.54% (12/339) in the right INV group. The incidence of perioperative complications was 1.43% (4/280) and the long-term complications was 3.93% (11/280) in the right INV group. There was no significant difference in the incidence of complications between the two groups (P=0.785,P=0.799, respectively). Conclusions: US-guided TIVADs via the right INV approach and the right IJV approach are both safe and reliable. The right INV approach improves the one-time puncture success rate, as long as the technique is properly operated, serious complications rarely occur.
Purpose: To compare the efficacy and safety of right internal jugular vein (IJV) approach and right innominate vein (INV) approach for US-guided totally implantable venous access devices (TIVADs), and to explore the advantages and disadvantages of the two approaches. Methods: Six hundred and nineteen adult patients had long-term infusion and chemotherapy needs and inconvenience of peripheral venous infusion. Right INV approach was used to implant 339 cases of TIVADs, and right IJV approach was used to implant 280 cases of TIVADs. The success rate of one-time catheterization and the incidence of complications in the two groups were retrospectively analyzed. Results: All patients were successfully implanted in TIVAD. The success rates of one-time puncture in INV group and IJV approach group were 98.53% (334/339) and 95.36% (267/280), respectively. There was significant difference between the two groups (P=0.020). The incidence of perioperative complications was 1.18% (4/339) and the long-term complications was 3.54% (12/339) in the right INV group. The incidence of perioperative complications was 1.43% (4/280) and the long-term complications was 3.93% (11/280) in the right INV group. There was no significant difference in the incidence of complications between the two groups (P=0.785,P=0.799, respectively). Conclusions: US-guided TIVADs via the right INV approach and the right IJV approach are both safe and reliable. The right INV approach improves the one-time puncture success rate, as long as the technique is properly operated, serious complications rarely occur.
Purpose: To compare the efficacy and safety of right internal jugular vein (IJV) approach and right innominate vein (INV) approach for US-guided totally implantable venous access devices (TIVADs), and to explore the advantages and disadvantages of the two approaches. Methods: Six hundred and nineteen adult patients had long-term infusion and chemotherapy needs and inconvenience of peripheral venous infusion. Right INV approach was used to implant 339 cases of TIVADs, and right IJV approach was used to implant 280 cases of TIVADs. The success rate of one-time catheterization and the incidence of complications in the two groups were retrospectively analyzed. Results: All patients were successfully implanted in TIVAD. The success rates of one-time puncture in INV group and IJV approach group were 98.53% (334/339) and 95.36% (267/280), respectively. There was significant difference between the two groups (P=0.020). The incidence of perioperative complications was 1.18% (4/339) and the long-term complications was 3.54% (12/339) in the right INV group. The incidence of perioperative complications was 1.43% (4/280) and the long-term complications was 3.93% (11/280) in the right INV group. There was no significant difference in the incidence of complications between the two groups (P=0.785,P=0.799, respectively). Conclusions: US-guided TIVADs via the right INV approach and the right IJV approach are both safe and reliable. The right INV approach improves the one-time puncture success rate, as long as the technique is properly operated, serious complications rarely occur.
Background: Traumatic lymphatic leakage is a rare but potentially life-threatening complication. The purpose of this study was to introduce the technique of ultrasound-guided intranodal lymphangiography and embolization in the postoperative lymphatic leakage in patients with cancer.Methods: During January 2018 and June 2020, seven cancer patients (three males, four females, aged 59-75 years [mean 67.57 ± 6.11 years]) developed lymphatic leakage after abdominal or pelvic surgery, with drainage volume ranging from 550 to 1200 mL per day. The procedure and follow-up of ultrasound-guided intranodal lymphangiography and embolization were recorded. This study retrospectively analysed the technical success rate, operation time, hospital stay, clinical efficacy, and complications.Results:The operation was technically successful in all patients. Angiography revealed leakage and embolization was performed in all the seven patients (7/7, 100%). The operative time of angiography and embolization was 41 to 68 minutes, with an average time of 53.29 ± 10.27 minutes. The mean length of stay was 3.51±1.13 days. Lymph node embolization was finally clinically successful in five patients (5/7, 71.43%), with a significant reduction in or disappearance of chylous ascites. The other two patients received surgical treatment 2 weeks later due to poor results after embolization. All patients were followed-up for 2 weeks. No serious complications or only minor complications were found in all the patients.Conclusions:Ultrasound-guided intranodal lymphangiography and embolization are easy to tolerance, with a low incidence of complications. Early intervention is recommended for cancer patients with postoperative lymphatic leakage.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.