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: [Long term central venous catheterization revisited].
    Author: Palermo S, Campolucci A, Capozza F, Cammardella MP, Balestrero A, Ferrando F, Basta P, Launo C.
    Journal: Minerva Anestesiol; 1995 Nov; 61(11):451-6. PubMed ID: 8677035.
    Abstract:
    The authors describe their experience about long-term VAD (Venous Access Devices) placement and in particular of placement techniques types of catheters, complications, and risk and benefit. 243 placements of VAD in 112 males and 131 females mainly affected by leukemia or breast cancer have been analyzed. 145 Leonard, 54 Groshong and 44 Hickman type silicon catheters have been implanted. The preferred access vein was the right internal jugular vein in 75% of patients and the right subclavian vein in the remained. The results show implant success in 98.7% of the patients. Complications have been rare and not serious and they have been divided into: 1) complications due to venipuncture, 2) complications during implant, 3) complications during the staying of catheter, 4) complications during the removal. The authors underline the advantages of puncture access through the right internal jugular vein in comparison with access through the right subclavian vein. Groshong type catheter is better than Leonard and Hickman. Very few infections have been noticed and patients seem to accept more willingly percutaneous placement than surgical one.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]