BACKGROUND Central venous access is essential for administering chemotherapy in patients with gastrointestinal cancer.Peripherally inserted central catheters(PICC)and totally implantable venous access ports(TIVAP)are ...BACKGROUND Central venous access is essential for administering chemotherapy in patients with gastrointestinal cancer.Peripherally inserted central catheters(PICC)and totally implantable venous access ports(TIVAP)are widely used,but comparative data regarding their impact on catheter-related complications and quality of life(QoL)remain limited.AIM To evaluate the impact of TIVAPs compared with PICC on catheter-related complications and QoL in patients with gastrointestinal cancer undergoing chemotherapy.METHODS This retrospective study included adults with gastrointestinal cancer who underwent central venous access device insertion for chemotherapy at our institution between December 2021 and December 2024.Inclusion criteria encompassed indications for intermittent intravenous chemotherapy,anticipated treatment duration of≥12 weeks,an adequate preoperative hematologic profile,accessible upper body veins,and complete medical records.Patients were excluded if they had an anticipated survival of less than three months,active systemic infection,severe thrombosis or coagulopathy,communication barriers,or an urgent need for dialysis access.Patients were assigned to either the PICC or TIVAP group based on device type.Data collected included demographic variables,cancer characteristics,insertion procedure details,complications,and QoL,assessed via the EuroQol 5-Dimensions-3 levels,visual analogue scale,and the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QoL Questionnaire-Core 30.RESULTS A total of 346 patients were analyzed.Baseline demographic,clinical,and cancer characteristics were similar between groups.The TIVAP group demonstrated a significantly lower incidence of catheter-related complications than the PICC group,with no pneumothorax occurring in either group.QoL assessments at baseline were comparable.At one month,the TIVAP group exhibited significantly higher EuroQoL Five Dimensions health state scores and QLQ-C30 global health status scores.Multivariate analysis identified TIVAP use,catheter tip placement in the distal superior vena cava/right atrium,prophylactic antibiotic administration,and antimicrobial dressing application as independent protective factors associated with reduced complications and improved QoL.CONCLUSION In patients with gastrointestinal cancer undergoing chemotherapy,TIVAPs are associated with a lower incidence of catheter-related complications and improved QoL than PICCs.Optimal device selection,precise catheter tip positioning,and effective perioperative management are critical for minimizing complications and enhancing patient-reported outcomes during treatment.展开更多
BACKGROUND Peripherally inserted central catheters(PICCs)are crucial for patients requiring long-term intravenous therapy,especially within digestive surgery under bundled care protocols.AIM To evaluate and compare th...BACKGROUND Peripherally inserted central catheters(PICCs)are crucial for patients requiring long-term intravenous therapy,especially within digestive surgery under bundled care protocols.AIM To evaluate and compare the efficacy,safety,and patient-reported outcomes of single-lumen vs double-lumen PICCs among patients undergoing digestive surgery within a structured bundled care framework.METHODS This retrospective cohort study analyzed data from 249 patients who underwent digestive surgery and utilized either single-lumen(n=117)or double-lumen(n=132)PICCs between January 2021 and June 2024.Clinical outcomes,patient satisfaction,catheterization duration,and complication rates were compared using statistical analysis via SPSS(version 29.0).The bundled care protocol was consistently applied,focusing on standardized procedures,staff training,and patient support.RESULTS Single-lumen PICCs were associated with a significantly lower thrombosis rate(0.85%)than double-lumen PICCs(6.82%,P=0.039).The single-lumen group experienced shorter catheterization durations(12.5±3.14 days vs 13.6±4.50 days,P=0.025)and higher successful infusion rates(92.7%±5.32%vs 90.4%±6.60%,P=0.003).This group also reported higher comfort scores(8.40±1.20 vs 7.90±1.50,P=0.004)and lower pain levels(2.90±0.70 vs 3.20±0.80,P=0.002).Aside from thrombosis,complication rates showed no significant difference between the groups.CONCLUSION Within bundled care context,single-lumen PICCs demonstrated advantages in reducing thrombosis risk,procedural efficiency,patient comfort,and satisfaction compared with double-lumen PICCs.The findings underscore the importance of considering patient-specific needs and clinical scenarios in catheter choice.展开更多
文摘BACKGROUND Central venous access is essential for administering chemotherapy in patients with gastrointestinal cancer.Peripherally inserted central catheters(PICC)and totally implantable venous access ports(TIVAP)are widely used,but comparative data regarding their impact on catheter-related complications and quality of life(QoL)remain limited.AIM To evaluate the impact of TIVAPs compared with PICC on catheter-related complications and QoL in patients with gastrointestinal cancer undergoing chemotherapy.METHODS This retrospective study included adults with gastrointestinal cancer who underwent central venous access device insertion for chemotherapy at our institution between December 2021 and December 2024.Inclusion criteria encompassed indications for intermittent intravenous chemotherapy,anticipated treatment duration of≥12 weeks,an adequate preoperative hematologic profile,accessible upper body veins,and complete medical records.Patients were excluded if they had an anticipated survival of less than three months,active systemic infection,severe thrombosis or coagulopathy,communication barriers,or an urgent need for dialysis access.Patients were assigned to either the PICC or TIVAP group based on device type.Data collected included demographic variables,cancer characteristics,insertion procedure details,complications,and QoL,assessed via the EuroQol 5-Dimensions-3 levels,visual analogue scale,and the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QoL Questionnaire-Core 30.RESULTS A total of 346 patients were analyzed.Baseline demographic,clinical,and cancer characteristics were similar between groups.The TIVAP group demonstrated a significantly lower incidence of catheter-related complications than the PICC group,with no pneumothorax occurring in either group.QoL assessments at baseline were comparable.At one month,the TIVAP group exhibited significantly higher EuroQoL Five Dimensions health state scores and QLQ-C30 global health status scores.Multivariate analysis identified TIVAP use,catheter tip placement in the distal superior vena cava/right atrium,prophylactic antibiotic administration,and antimicrobial dressing application as independent protective factors associated with reduced complications and improved QoL.CONCLUSION In patients with gastrointestinal cancer undergoing chemotherapy,TIVAPs are associated with a lower incidence of catheter-related complications and improved QoL than PICCs.Optimal device selection,precise catheter tip positioning,and effective perioperative management are critical for minimizing complications and enhancing patient-reported outcomes during treatment.
文摘BACKGROUND Peripherally inserted central catheters(PICCs)are crucial for patients requiring long-term intravenous therapy,especially within digestive surgery under bundled care protocols.AIM To evaluate and compare the efficacy,safety,and patient-reported outcomes of single-lumen vs double-lumen PICCs among patients undergoing digestive surgery within a structured bundled care framework.METHODS This retrospective cohort study analyzed data from 249 patients who underwent digestive surgery and utilized either single-lumen(n=117)or double-lumen(n=132)PICCs between January 2021 and June 2024.Clinical outcomes,patient satisfaction,catheterization duration,and complication rates were compared using statistical analysis via SPSS(version 29.0).The bundled care protocol was consistently applied,focusing on standardized procedures,staff training,and patient support.RESULTS Single-lumen PICCs were associated with a significantly lower thrombosis rate(0.85%)than double-lumen PICCs(6.82%,P=0.039).The single-lumen group experienced shorter catheterization durations(12.5±3.14 days vs 13.6±4.50 days,P=0.025)and higher successful infusion rates(92.7%±5.32%vs 90.4%±6.60%,P=0.003).This group also reported higher comfort scores(8.40±1.20 vs 7.90±1.50,P=0.004)and lower pain levels(2.90±0.70 vs 3.20±0.80,P=0.002).Aside from thrombosis,complication rates showed no significant difference between the groups.CONCLUSION Within bundled care context,single-lumen PICCs demonstrated advantages in reducing thrombosis risk,procedural efficiency,patient comfort,and satisfaction compared with double-lumen PICCs.The findings underscore the importance of considering patient-specific needs and clinical scenarios in catheter choice.
