-
Je něco špatně v tomto záznamu ?
Aetiology and management of persistent withdrawal occlusion in venous ports in oncology patients
V. Maňásek, J. Zapletalová, L. Olosová, I. Filáková, I. Kociánová, K. Drdová, J. Škarda, V. Chovanec, D. Vrána
Jazyk angličtina Země Anglie, Velká Británie
Typ dokumentu časopisecké články
NLK
Directory of Open Access Journals
od 2020
PubMed Central
od 1999
Medline Complete (EBSCOhost)
od 2010-01-01
ROAD: Directory of Open Access Scholarly Resources
od 1933
- MeSH
- dospělí MeSH
- katetrizace centrálních vén škodlivé účinky MeSH
- lidé středního věku MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- nádory * farmakoterapie komplikace MeSH
- neprůchodnost katétru etiologie MeSH
- senioři MeSH
- zaváděcí katétry škodlivé účinky MeSH
- Check Tag
- dospělí MeSH
- lidé středního věku MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- mužské pohlaví MeSH
- senioři MeSH
- ženské pohlaví MeSH
- Publikační typ
- časopisecké články MeSH
INTRODUCTION: Persistent withdrawal occlusion (PWO) is a specific catheter malfunction characterized by the inability to withdraw blood through the device. The most common cause of PWO in ports is the presence of a fibroblastic sleeve (FS). If malfunction occurs, medication can be applied incorrectly with the increased risk of complications. METHODS: One hundred seventy-seven cases of PWO in venous ports were managed. We focused on evaluating the cause of PWO, the frequency of occurrence of FS, and the options to address the malfunction. The patients underwent fluoroscopy with a contrast agent administration. Mechanical disruption (MD) with a syringe of saline using the flush method was used; in case of its failure, subsequent administration of a lock solution with taurolidine and urokinase, or low-dose thrombolysis with alteplase was indicated. Demographic data were compared with a control group. RESULTS: A significantly higher proportion of female patients was found in the cohort of patients with PWO (80.3% vs 66.3%, p = 0.004), dominantly patients with ovarian cancer (12.8% vs 4.8%, p = 0.022). No effect of the cannulated vein or the type of treatment on the incidence of PWO was demonstrated. The presence of FS was verified in 70% of cases. MD with a syringe was successful in 53.5% of cases. A significantly shorter time to referral (3 weeks) was demonstrated with successful management. The overall success rate of achieving desobliteration by MD alone or in combination with a thrombolytic (urokinase or alteplase) administration was 97.4%. CONCLUSION: We created a method for resolving PWO using MD +/- application of thrombolytics with 97.4% success rate. Current evidence showed that FS is not likely to be affected by thrombolytic drugs; however, we have ascertained an effect of these drugs, proposing a hypothesis of microthrombotic events at the tip of the catheter if fibroblastic sleeve is present.
Citace poskytuje Crossref.org
- 000
- 00000naa a2200000 a 4500
- 001
- bmc24019832
- 003
- CZ-PrNML
- 005
- 20241024111043.0
- 007
- ta
- 008
- 241015s2024 enk f 000 0|eng||
- 009
- AR
- 024 7_
- $a 10.1177/00368504241260374 $2 doi
- 035 __
- $a (PubMed)39096050
- 040 __
- $a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
- 041 0_
- $a eng
- 044 __
- $a enk
- 100 1_
- $a Maňásek, V $u Vascular Access Center, Oncology Center of Agel Nový Jičín Hospital, Nový Jičín, Czech Republic $1 https://orcid.org/0009000746996025
- 245 10
- $a Aetiology and management of persistent withdrawal occlusion in venous ports in oncology patients / $c V. Maňásek, J. Zapletalová, L. Olosová, I. Filáková, I. Kociánová, K. Drdová, J. Škarda, V. Chovanec, D. Vrána
- 520 9_
- $a INTRODUCTION: Persistent withdrawal occlusion (PWO) is a specific catheter malfunction characterized by the inability to withdraw blood through the device. The most common cause of PWO in ports is the presence of a fibroblastic sleeve (FS). If malfunction occurs, medication can be applied incorrectly with the increased risk of complications. METHODS: One hundred seventy-seven cases of PWO in venous ports were managed. We focused on evaluating the cause of PWO, the frequency of occurrence of FS, and the options to address the malfunction. The patients underwent fluoroscopy with a contrast agent administration. Mechanical disruption (MD) with a syringe of saline using the flush method was used; in case of its failure, subsequent administration of a lock solution with taurolidine and urokinase, or low-dose thrombolysis with alteplase was indicated. Demographic data were compared with a control group. RESULTS: A significantly higher proportion of female patients was found in the cohort of patients with PWO (80.3% vs 66.3%, p = 0.004), dominantly patients with ovarian cancer (12.8% vs 4.8%, p = 0.022). No effect of the cannulated vein or the type of treatment on the incidence of PWO was demonstrated. The presence of FS was verified in 70% of cases. MD with a syringe was successful in 53.5% of cases. A significantly shorter time to referral (3 weeks) was demonstrated with successful management. The overall success rate of achieving desobliteration by MD alone or in combination with a thrombolytic (urokinase or alteplase) administration was 97.4%. CONCLUSION: We created a method for resolving PWO using MD +/- application of thrombolytics with 97.4% success rate. Current evidence showed that FS is not likely to be affected by thrombolytic drugs; however, we have ascertained an effect of these drugs, proposing a hypothesis of microthrombotic events at the tip of the catheter if fibroblastic sleeve is present.
- 650 _2
- $a lidé $7 D006801
- 650 _2
- $a ženské pohlaví $7 D005260
- 650 _2
- $a mužské pohlaví $7 D008297
- 650 _2
- $a lidé středního věku $7 D008875
- 650 12
- $a nádory $x farmakoterapie $x komplikace $7 D009369
- 650 _2
- $a senioři $7 D000368
- 650 _2
- $a dospělí $7 D000328
- 650 _2
- $a katetrizace centrálních vén $x škodlivé účinky $7 D002405
- 650 _2
- $a zaváděcí katétry $x škodlivé účinky $7 D002408
- 650 _2
- $a neprůchodnost katétru $x etiologie $7 D061807
- 655 _2
- $a časopisecké články $7 D016428
- 700 1_
- $a Zapletalová, J $u Vascular Access Center, Oncology Center of Agel Nový Jičín Hospital, Nový Jičín, Czech Republic
- 700 1_
- $a Olosová, L $u Vascular Access Center, Oncology Center of Agel Nový Jičín Hospital, Nový Jičín, Czech Republic
- 700 1_
- $a Filáková, I $u Vascular Access Center, Oncology Center of Agel Nový Jičín Hospital, Nový Jičín, Czech Republic
- 700 1_
- $a Kociánová, I $u Vascular Access Center, Oncology Center of Agel Nový Jičín Hospital, Nový Jičín, Czech Republic
- 700 1_
- $a Drdová, K $u Vascular Access Center, Oncology Center of Agel Nový Jičín Hospital, Nový Jičín, Czech Republic
- 700 1_
- $a Škarda, J $u Vascular Access Center, Oncology Center of Agel Nový Jičín Hospital, Nový Jičín, Czech Republic
- 700 1_
- $a Chovanec, V $u Vascular Access Center, Oncology Center of Agel Nový Jičín Hospital, Nový Jičín, Czech Republic $1 https://orcid.org/0000000198603616
- 700 1_
- $a Vrána, D $u Vascular Access Center, Oncology Center of Agel Nový Jičín Hospital, Nový Jičín, Czech Republic
- 773 0_
- $w MED00004290 $t Science progress $x 2047-7163 $g Roč. 107, č. 3 (2024), s. 368504241260374
- 856 41
- $u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39096050 $y Pubmed
- 910 __
- $a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y - $z 0
- 990 __
- $a 20241015 $b ABA008
- 991 __
- $a 20241024111037 $b ABA008
- 999 __
- $a ok $b bmc $g 2202195 $s 1231805
- BAS __
- $a 3
- BAS __
- $a PreBMC-MEDLINE
- BMC __
- $a 2024 $b 107 $c 3 $d 368504241260374 $e - $i 2047-7163 $m Science progress $n Sci Prog $x MED00004290
- LZP __
- $a Pubmed-20241015