Is PICC or port better for patients with malignant bone and soft tissue tumors of the lower limbs? A retrospective study

Abstract

Purpose: To compare the effects of peripherally inserted central catheters (PICC) and totally implantable venous access devices (port) in terms of complications and shoulder function in patients with malignant bone and soft tissue tumors of the lower limbs. Patients and methods: We analyzed 65 cases of port and 65 cases of PICC at the orthopedic department of the Fourth Hospital of Hebei Medical University. The two groups were compared in terms of catheter indwelling time, catheter-related complications, Constant-Murley shoulder function score, and displacement of the position of the catheter end on the catheterization side. Results: Compared to the PICC group, at six months after catheterization the port group showed better outcomes for catheter indwelling time, catheter-related complications, and Constant-Murley score for the catheterization-side shoulder joint (p < 0.05). The port group also showed less displacement of the catheter end position after 180° abduction of the catheterization-side shoulder joint (p < 0.05). Conclusion: Compared with PICC, port can prolong catheter indwelling time, reduce catheter-related complications, and maintain shoulder joint function, which makes it an ideal venous-access approach when providing chemotherapy to patients with malignant bone and soft tissue tumors of the lower limbs.