These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Radiologic placement of long-term central venous peripheral access system ports (PAS Port): results in 150 patients.
    Author: Foley MJ.
    Journal: J Vasc Interv Radiol; 1995; 6(2):255-62. PubMed ID: 7787360.
    Abstract:
    PURPOSE: The author reports experience with 150 peripheral access system ports (PAS Ports) placed in an interventional radiology suite. Complication rates from this series are compared with those of surgically placed tunneled catheters. The average cost of placement is compared with that of a surgically placed chest port. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Findings were retrospectively reviewed in 150 patients in whom the PAS Port catheter was implanted. The age range was 26-84 years (mean, 46 years). The diagnoses in these patients included cancer (n = 68), acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (n = 52), osteomyelitis (n = 21), and abscess (n = 9). Implantation with use of fluoroscopic guidance and "Cath-finder" technology is described. RESULTS: One hundred fifty ports have been indwelling for a total of 24,151 patient days (range, 40-220 days; mean duration, 161 days). Sepsis occurred in 3.3%, local infection in 5% (early infection 1%, late infection 4%), temporary catheter occlusion in 3.3%, postinsertion phlebitis in 7.3%, and venous thrombosis in 2%. The cost of radiologic PAS Port insertion averaged $1,488 versus $3,720 for surgical chest port insertion. CONCLUSION: PAS Port central venous catheter placement by an interventional radiologist in this series is safe and cost effective and compares very favorably with surgery. Radiologists will likely see increasing requests by referring physicians for radiologically placed catheters and ports in this era of cost containment.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]