Koceila Amroun, Mathias Brugel, Rami Rhaiem, Lugdivine Teuma, Geoffrey Vannieuwenhuyse, Audrey Lipere, Esteban Brenet, Reza Kianmanesh, Olivier Bouché

Assessing the time-to-removal of totally implantable venous access devices comparing valved-versus open-ended catheters in patients treated with chemotherapy

  • Nephrology
  • Surgery
Save to CiteDrive Show PDF

Background: Totally IntraVenous Acess Devices (TIVAD) are used to have long-term bloodstream access. The catheter connected to the subcutaneous chamber may be valved (TIVAD-V) or open-ended (TIVAD-O). Infectious and occlusion complications require the removal of the TIVAD. We compared the two types of catheters (TIVAD-V and TIVAD-O) in terms of time-to-removal and complication rates. Methods: A retrospective study of 636 patients treated for any malignancy using a TIVAD were included. TIVAD complication was defined as the occurrence of infection or occlusion requiring TIVAD removal. Risk factors of complications and time-to-removal of TIVAD were assessed by a Cox proportional hazard analysis. Results: A total of 55 TIVADs (8.7%) were removed including 47 for infection and eight for occlusion in 54 months. There was no significant difference in the frequency of complications between TIVAD-V and TIVAD-O. There was no significant difference in time-to-removal between TIVAD-V and TIVAD-O (17.0 months, IQR [10.5–25.0] and 18.4 months, IQR [11.5–22.9], p = 0.345, respectively). Conclusion: There was no difference between TIVAD with valved and open catheter in terms of complications and time-to-removal in patients treated by chemotherapy.

Need a simple solution for managing your BibTeX entries? Explore CiteDrive!

  • Web-based, modern reference management
  • Collaborate and share with fellow researchers
  • Integration with Overleaf
  • Comprehensive BibTeX/BibLaTeX support
  • Save articles and websites directly from your browser
  • Search for new articles from a database of tens of millions of references
Try out CiteDrive

More from our Archive