IP267 External Jugular Vein Cutdown Approach Vs Percutaneous Approach for Totally Implantable Venous Access Device Placement: A Safe, Fast, and Cheap Method

Jie Yin,Xiansheng Zhang,Gong Cheng
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvs.2017.03.238
IF: 4.86
2017-01-01
Journal of Vascular Surgery
Abstract:External jugular vein (EJV) cutdown for totally implantable venous access device (TIVAD) placement has been accepted as an alternative to the percutaneous subclavian vein approach. The aim of this work was to report a retrospective and monocentric study concerning the feasibility and complications of this surgical technique. Patients receiving a TIVAD from January 2010 to December 2015 were included in this study. Age, sex, surgical technique, disease, device used, length of the procedure, and morbidity were considered. There were 426 TIVADs placed in 418 patients: 149 males (35.6%) and 269 females (64.4%) aged 1 to 73 years. Of 425 patients, 172 underwent an EJV cut down on the first attempt, and 161 (93.6%) procedures were successful. Among the remaining 11 patients, seven (63.6%) underwent a TIVAD placement through the ipsilateral internal jugular vein and through the ipsilateral subclavian vein in the other four. Complications were identified in 11 ports in EJV group (6.25%) and in 35 ports in percutaneous puncture group (14.1%; P < .05). TIVAD placement by the EJV cutdown approach is safe and fast, and its success rate is very high. By avoiding the immediate complications associated with the percutaneous approach, the EJV cutdown has to be considered a valid, safe.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?