Comparative Study between Portacath Placement in the Central or Peripheral Veins for Chemotherapy | ||
| International Journal of Medical Arts | ||
| Article 10, Volume 6, Issue 11, November 2024, Pages 5106-5115 PDF (1.51 M) | ||
| Document Type: Original Article | ||
| DOI: 10.21608/ijma.2024.315470.2025 | ||
| Authors | ||
| Ramy Mohamed Abd El- Rahman Al-meshlawey* 1; Mohamed Abd El-Hamid Abd El-Rahman2; Mohamed Hamza Hamed2 | ||
| 1Department of General Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Menoufia University, Shebeen Elkom, Menoufia, Egypt. | ||
| 2Department of Vascular Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Al- Azhar University, Cairo, Egypt. | ||
| Abstract | ||
| Background: The conventional approach for central peripheral intravenous catheter [PaC] insertion involves the utilization of a central vein, such as the internal jugular or subclavian vein, often necessitating the administration of a general anesthesia. Aim of the study: This work aimed to evaluate the safety and convenience of peripherally placed Portacath catheters in comparison to central venous catheters for the administration of chemotherapy in cancer patients. Patients and Methods: A randomized controlled trial included 50 cancer patients at Al-Hussein and Sayed Galal University Hospitals and Menoufia University Hospital, during the period spanning from July 2023 to April 2024. Participants were assigned to group A consisted of 25 patients who required the insertion of a central vein Portacath catheter through the internal jugular veins using a Portacath 8:10 f and group B comprised 25 patients who required the insertion of a peripheral vein Portacath through the basilic veins, utilizing a Portacath 3:5 f. Results: Group A and B exhibited statistically significant disparity in regarding local infection, skin condition, and wound healing outcomes [p<0.05]. All individuals included in the study exhibited normal X-rays and free Doppler evaluations. A substantial statistical difference was seen between groups A and B in terms of hematoma at the access location and arterial puncture [p<0.05]. A statistically significant disparity was seen between group A and group B concerning various dimensions of comfort, anxiety induced by the device, disruption in daily activities, and overall satisfaction score [p<0.05]. Conclusion: The jugular Portacath and basilic Portacath techniques were both safe and effective for central venous catheterization while administering chemotherapy. Furthermore, port catheters offer optimal vascular access for those diagnosed with cancer, hence enhancing their overall quality of life. | ||
| Keywords | ||
| Central Catheters; Internal Jugular Vein; Peripheral Inserted Portacath; Postoperative Complications | ||
|
Statistics Article View: 99 PDF Download: 75 |
||
