• Users Online: 920
  • Home
  • Print this page
  • Email this page
Home About us Editorial board Search Ahead of print Current issue Archives Submit article Instructions Contacts Login 

 Table of Contents  
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2014  |  Volume : 34  |  Issue : 4  |  Page : 161-165

Predictive risk factors for fracture at catheter of totally implantable venous access devices via subclavian vein insertion


1 Department of Surgery, Division of General Surgery, Tri-Service General Hospital, National Defense Medical Center, Taiepi, Taiwan, Republic of China
2 School of Public Health, National Defense Medical Center, Taipei, Taiwan, Republic of China

Date of Submission08-Jan-2014
Date of Decision05-Feb-2014
Date of Acceptance27-Feb-2014
Date of Web Publication26-Aug-2014

Correspondence Address:
Dr. De-Chuan Chan
Department of Surgery, Division of General Surgery, Tri-Service General Hospital, National Defense Medical Center, No. 325, Sec. 2, Cheng-Kung Road, Taipei 114, Taiwan
Republic of China
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/1011-4564.139186

Rights and Permissions
  Abstract 

Background: Fracture of totally implantable venous access devices (TIVAD) is a rare but potential serious complication. We aimed to explore the risk factors for fracture at catheter of TIVAD via subclavian vein insertion. Materials and Methods: From January 2008 to July 2010 the records of 34 patients with fractured TIVAD were retrospectively reviewed. The comparison group included 170 randomly selected cases (5 for every patient with a fractured catheter) from 3919 cases of TIVAD implantations without catheter fracture. Variables associated with catheter implantation and the relationship between the catheter and the clavicle were analyzed. Results: Statistical analysis revealed implantation method, duration of implantation, brand of device, and port-clavicle distance were predictive risk factors for catheter fracture on univariate analysis. Duration of implantation >200 days and port-clavicle distance <2.5 cm were independent risk factors for catheter fracture on multivariate analysis. Stratified analysis indicated that a port-clavicle distance <2.5 cm in patients with duration of TIVAD implantation >200 days was associated with a significantly increased risk of catheter fracture. Conclusions: We suggested that TIVAD with a port-clavicle distance <2.5 cm could be removed to prevent catheter fracture when the implantation duration is more than 200 days.

Keywords: Venous access device, implantable, fracture


How to cite this article:
Chang H M, Chou Y C, Hsu S D, Liao G S, Chen T W, Hsieh C B, Chen C J, Yu J C, Chan DC. Predictive risk factors for fracture at catheter of totally implantable venous access devices via subclavian vein insertion. J Med Sci 2014;34:161-5

How to cite this URL:
Chang H M, Chou Y C, Hsu S D, Liao G S, Chen T W, Hsieh C B, Chen C J, Yu J C, Chan DC. Predictive risk factors for fracture at catheter of totally implantable venous access devices via subclavian vein insertion. J Med Sci [serial online] 2014 [cited 2019 Dec 15];34:161-5. Available from: http://www.jmedscindmc.com/text.asp?2014/34/4/161/139186


  Introduction Top


Totally implantable venous access devices (TIVAD) are commonly used for delivery of chemotherapy. The early and late complications of TIVAD implantation including pneumothorax, infection, obstruction, and catheter fracture are well-described in the literature. [1] Catheter fracture is a rare and had potential serious complication after TIVAD implantation. A fragmented catheter lodged in the heart may induce arrhythmias or embolization to the pulmonary artery and should be retrieved immediately when recognized. [2] Catheter fracture may be preceded by constant compression of the catheter between the clavicle and first rib (the "pinch-off sign" on chest radiograph). [3] In the literature, there are few reports describing the possible mechanisms of TIVAD fracture. [2],[4],[5] We aimed to analysis the risk factors of TIVAD fracture.


  Materials and Methods Top


We conducted a retrospective analysis of 34 patients in whom TIVAD occurred between January 2008 and July 2010. The comparison group with 170 cases (5 cases for every patient with TIVAD fracture) were randomly selected by Statistical Package for Social Sciences version 15.0 (SPSS, Inc., Chicago, IL, USA) from 3919 patients with TIVAD without fracture during the same period. All patients received TIVAD via subclavian vein implantation for administration of chemotherapy. The study was approved by the Institutional Review Board and Ethics Committee.

The variables included in the study were the demographic (age, sex, primary malignancy, method and duration of implantation) and radiological characteristics (location of the fracture, presence/absence of the pinch-off sign, side, brand of device implanted, angle and distance between the clavicle and port). Exclusion criteria were as follows : i0 mplantation of the TIVAD through the jugular vein or femoral vein; no posteroanterior (PA) view chest radiograph performed after implantation (variation in measuring the port-clavicle distance and angle present on other chest radiography views); implantation the TIVAD for parenteral or venous access; and malposition of the TIVAD (tip of the TIVAD was not positioned in the superior vena cava).

Totally implantable venous access devices implantation by cut-down or the puncture method was performed in the same fashion. [6] Three brands of TIVAD were implanted in this study:

  1. BardPort (Bard Access Systems, Salt Lake City, UT, USA),
  2. Arrow (Arrow international, Reading, PA, USA), and
  3. Port-A-Cath (SIMS, Deltec, Inc., St. Paul, MN, USA).


In all patients, postoperative chest radiograph was performed for identifying the location of the TIVAD. The port-clavicle distance was determined by measuring the minimum distance between clavicle and port of the TIVAD [Figure 1]. The port-clavicle angle of the TIVAD was measured on the PA chest radiograph [Figure 2]. All patients diagnosed with catheter fracture were immediately referred to cardiovascular physicians for removal of the fractured catheter. The SPSS version 15.0 was used for all analyses. The characteristics of the cases and control subjects were compared and tested for significant differences using Student's t-test for linear variables and a Pearson's Chi-squared test for categorical variables. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were constructed to determine the optimal cut-off point for continuous significant variables. The variables found to be significant on univariate analysis were included in the multivariate model to evaluate the risk of catheter fracture. Stratified analysis was used to test whether identical regression models were appropriate for different groups. Values were expressed as mean ± standard deviation, and estimated odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the association between the potential risk factors and catheter fracture risk were calculated. A value of P < 0.05 was considered to indicate statistical significance.
Figure 1: Measurement of the minimum distance between the clavicle and port of the totally implantable venous access devices (white arrow)

Click here to view
Figure 2: Measurement of the angle between the port and the clavicle (white arrow)

Click here to view



  Results Top


A total of 204 cases was included in the analysis, and the demographic and clinical characteristics of the patients are presented in [Table 1]. The most common location of catheter fracture was the port-catheter junction 88% (30/34), and the other four cases of fracture were located at the level of the first rib and clavicle. The rate of catheter fracture was 0.86% (34/3953) among all implanted TIVAD during this period, and all fractured catheters were successfully retrieved by a goose-neck snare device.
Table 1: Patient characteristics

Click here to view


Analysis showed that the implantation method, brand of device, duration of implantation, and port-clavicle distance were significant factors associated with fracture on univariate analysis. The ROC curve showed the cut-off point for the duration of implantation was 200 days, and the port-clavicle distance was 2.5 cm. The variables of implantation method (cut-down or puncture), device brand (A, B, C), duration of implantation (>200 days or <200 days), and port-clavicle distance (>2.5 cm or <2.5 cm) were included in the multivariate analysis. The results of the multivariate analysis for the risk factors of catheter fracture are shown in [Table 2]. The factors that independently correlated with fracture of the TIVAD were duration of implantation >200 days and port-clavicle distance <2.5 cm. Stratified analysis confirmed that a port-clavicle distance <2.5 cm was associated with a significantly higher risk of catheter fracture (OR = 13.04, 95% CI: 4.16-40.87, P < 0.001) in patients with a duration of TIVAD implantation >200 days [Table 3].
Table 2: Multivariate analysis of variables associated with risk factors of catheter fracture

Click here to view
Table 3: Stratified analysis by duration of implantation for risk factors of catheter fracture

Click here to view



  Discussion Top


A fractured catheter is a rare, but life-threatening complication, and the incidence of TIVAD fracture has been reported to range from 0.53% to 0.1%. [1],[6],[7] The published cases and possible mechanism of catheter fracture were summarized in [Table 4]. Signs of catheter fracture include local swelling, pain or increased resistance during port flushing, and palpitations without physical exertion, but some fragmented catheters may remain asymptomatic for years. [26],[27]
Table 4: The published cases and possible mechanism of catheter fracture

Click here to view


Fracture of the middle part of the catheter may be induced by constant compression of the catheter between the first-rib and clavicle (the pinch-off syndrome). [3] However, we found only a few (four cases) of fracture at the level of the first rib and clavicle, and only one case with the pinch-off sign in each group (i.e., fracture and not fractured groups). Lin et al.[5] and Cheng et al.[27] also reported similar findings regarding the fracture site of TIVAD. The mechanism of catheter fracture over the port-catheter junction may be extrinsic compression near the port-catheter junction combined with material fatigue caused by repeating bending of the catheter with shoulder movement, not pinch-off syndrome.

In univariate analysis, TIVAD implantation method, brand of device, and duration and distance between the port and the clavicle were associated with increased risk of catheter fracture. The puncture method for TIVAD implantation was associated with an increased risk of catheter fracture, similar to the findings in our previous report. [6] We believe that the reason of device brand and implantation duration are associated with catheter fracture is related to the composition of the catheter and material fatigue due to repeated loading and unloading force. No catheter fracture was found on brand B of TIVAD in our study. The design of catheter connection to port (Cath-Lock system) may be an important cause for catheter fracture. [5] The Cath-Lock system with flexible and soft design may decrease the risk of catheter fracture by reducing the bending force during shoulder movement. The route of catheter was beneath the clavicle through subclavian vein and all ports were fixed in the upper chest near the clavicle. The relationship of port and clavicle with short distance may increase damage of the catheter by constant rubbing at the edge of the clavicle.

Materials science has shown that the shape of the structure significantly affects its fatigue life; a sharp angle may lead to increased local pressure and initiate fatigue cracks. Eventually, the cracks will reach a critical size, and the material will fail. [28] We thought that the shape of a TIVAD could be represented by measuring the port-clavicle angle; however, the results of our analysis showed that the port-clavicle angle did not increase the risk of catheter fracture.

Our findings are consistent with material fatigue theory that structural fractures are due to long duration of use and more extrinsic compressive force. The better design of TIVAD, the use cut-down method, shorter duration of implantation and longer port-clavicle distance could avoid catheter fracture.


  Conclusion Top


In this study, we investigated the risk factors of TIVAD fracture, and the results showed implantation more than 200 days and a port-clavicle distance <2.5 cm were independent factor for fracture of TIVAD on multivariate analysis, and a port-clavicle distance <2.5 cm was associated with a significantly higher risk of catheter fracture in patients with a duration of TIVAD implantation more than 200 days on stratified analysis. We suggested that TIVAD with a port-clavicle distance <2.5 cm could be removed to prevent catheter fracture when the implantation duration more than 200 days.


  Disclosure Top


The authors declare that this study has no conflict of interest and financial support.

 
  References Top

1.Di Carlo I, Cordio S, La Greca G, Privitera G, Russello D, Puleo S, et al. Totally implantable venous access devices implanted surgically : a0 retrospective study on early and late complications. Arch Surg 2001;136:1050-3.  Back to cited text no. 1
    
2.Klotz HP, Schöpke W, Kohler A, Pestalozzi B, Largiadèr F. Catheter fracture : a0 rare complication of totally implantable subclavian venous access devices. J Surg Oncol 1996;62:222-5.  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3.Mirza B, Vanek VW, Kupensky DT. Pinch-off syndrome : c0 ase report and collective review of the literature. Am Surg 2004;70:635-44.  Back to cited text no. 3
    
4.Debets JM, Wils JA, Schlangen JT. A rare complication of implanted central-venous access devices : c0 atheter fracture and embolization. Support Care Cancer 1995;3:432-4.  Back to cited text no. 4
    
5.Lin CH, Wu HS, Chan DC, Hsieh CB, Huang MH, Yu JC. The mechanisms of failure of totally implantable central venous access system : a0 nalysis of 73 cases with fracture of catheter. Eur J Surg Oncol 2010;36:100-3.  Back to cited text no. 5
    
6.Chang HM, Hsieh CB, Hsieh HF, Chen TW, Chen CJ, Chan DC, et al. An alternative technique for totally implantable central venous access devices. A retrospective study of 1311 cases. Eur J Surg Oncol 2006;32:90-3.  Back to cited text no. 6
    
7.Kapadia S, Parakh R, Grover T, Yadav A. Catheter fracture and cardiac migration of a totally implantable venous device. Indian J Cancer 2005;42:155-7.  Back to cited text no. 7
[PUBMED]  Medknow Journal  
8.Rebahi H, El Adib AG, Mouaffak Y, El Hattaoui M, Chaara A, Sadek H, et al. Catheter fracture and pulmonary embolization of the distal fragment: A rare complication of the totally implantable venous access port. Rev Med Interne 2013.  Back to cited text no. 8
    
9.Nagasawa Y, Shimizu T, Sonoda H, Chou H, Mekata E, Tani T. Is catheter rupture rare after totally implantable access port implantation via the right internal jugular vein? Report of a case. Surg Today 2013. [In press].  Back to cited text no. 9
    
10.Cortés-Flores AO, Morgan-Villela G, Juárez-Uzeta EA, Fuentes-Orozco C, Jiménez-Tornero J, González-Ojeda A. Totally implantable central venous access devices in patients with cancer. Experience at a private oncology center. Cir Cir 2012;80:429-34.  Back to cited text no. 10
    
11.Doley RP, Brar P, Chaudhary S, Bedi R, Swami AC, Wig JD. Port catheter fracture and migration in Internal Jugular Vein. Am J Case Rep 2012;13:14-6.  Back to cited text no. 11
    
12.Kim JT, Oh TY, Chang WH, Jeong YK. Clinical review and analysis of complications of totally implantable venous access devices for chemotherapy. Med Oncol 2012;29:1361-4.  Back to cited text no. 12
    
13.Shimizu T, Mekata E, Murata S, Yamamoto T, Tani T. A case of catheter fracture of a totally implantable access port introduced through the right internal jugular vein. J Surg Oncol 2011;103:460-1.  Back to cited text no. 13
    
14.Nishinari K, Wolosker N, Bernardi CV, Yazbek G. Totally implantable ports connected to valved catheters for chemotherapy : e0 xperience from 350 Groshong devices. J Vasc Access 2010;11:17-22.  Back to cited text no. 14
    
15.Wang CS, Yang CY, Chen SC, Chen HC, Huang MS. Hepatic migration of a catheter fragment followed by disconnection of a totally implantable venous access port. Int J Artif Organs 2008;31:1059-61.  Back to cited text no. 15
    
16.Ghayyda SN, Roland D, Cade A. Seat belt associated central line fracture : A0 previously unreported complication in cystic fibrosis. J Cyst Fibros 2008;7:448-9.  Back to cited text no. 16
    
17.Gowda MR, Gowda RM, Khan IA, Punukollu G, Chand SP, Bixon R, et al. Positional ventricular tachycardia from a fractured mediport catheter with right ventricular migration: A case report. Angiology 2004;55:557-60.  Back to cited text no. 17
    
18.Schummer W, Schummer C, Schelenz C. Case report : t0 he malfunctioning implanted venous access device. Br J Nurs 2003;12:210, 212-4.  Back to cited text no. 18
    
19.Denny MA, Frank LR. Ventricular tachycardia secondary to Port-A-Cath fracture and embolization. J Emerg Med 2003;24:29-34.  Back to cited text no. 19
    
20.Iannelli A, Kianmanesh R, Msika S, Marano A, Levesque M, Grandjean M, et al. Post-traumatic fracture and migration in the pulmonary artery of the catheter of a totally implantable venous access device. Unusual complication. Minerva Chir 2001;56:303-6.  Back to cited text no. 20
    
21.Ferrari A, Nahas S, Maccaferri R, Malacarne P. Pinch-off syndrome and rupture of totally implanted venous access. Report of a case. Recenti Prog Med 2000;91:297-300.  Back to cited text no. 21
    
22.Kock HJ, Pietsch M, Krause U, Wilke H, Eigler FW. Implantable vascular access systems : e0 xperience in 1500 patients with totally implanted central venous port systems. World J Surg 1998;22:12-6.  Back to cited text no. 22
    
23.Raungaard B, Thuesen L. Percutaneous removal of an in-situ embolised catheter fragment in a patient with Port-A-Cath. Ugeskr Laeger 1995;157:7152-3.  Back to cited text no. 23
    
24.Lorenz M, Hottenrott C, Seufert RM, Encke A. A totally implantable permanent central venous access, long-term experience with subcutaneous infusion chambers. Langenbecks Arch Chir 1988;373:302-9.  Back to cited text no. 24
    
25.Noyen J, Hoorntje J, de Langen Z, Leemslag JW, Sleijfer D. Spontaneous fracture of the catheter of a totally implantable venous access port : c0 ase report of a rare complication. J Clin Oncol 1987;5:1295-9.  Back to cited text no. 25
    
26.Van Den Akker-Berman LM, Pinzur S, Aydinalp A, Brezins M, Gellerman M, Elami A, et al. Uneventful 25-year course of an intracardiac intravenous catheter fragment in the right heart. J Interv Cardiol 2002;15:421-3.  Back to cited text no. 26
    
27.Cheng CC, Tsai TN, Yang CC, Han CL. Percutaneous retrieval of dislodged totally implantable central venous access system in 92 cases : e0 xperience in a single hospital. Eur J Radiol 2009;69:346-50.  Back to cited text no. 27
    
28.Schutz W. A history of fatigue. Engng Fract Mech 1996;54:263-300.  Back to cited text no. 28
    


    Figures

  [Figure 1], [Figure 2]
 
 
    Tables

  [Table 1], [Table 2], [Table 3], [Table 4]


This article has been cited by
1 Fracture at catheter of totally implantable venous access port with migration into the right pulmonary artery: A serious complication
Wala Ben Kridis,Mohamed Sahnoun,Hammadi Maraoui,Naceur Amari,Mounir Frikha
Acta Clinica Belgica. 2016; : 1
[Pubmed] | [DOI]



 

Top
 
 
  Search
 
Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
Access Statistics
Email Alert *
Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)

 
  In this article
Abstract
Introduction
Materials and Me...
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Disclosure
References
Article Figures
Article Tables

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed2701    
    Printed63    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded163    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 1    

Recommend this journal


[TAG2]
[TAG3]
[TAG4]