Risk factors assessment for radiographically guided port implantations with forearm access.

<h4>Introduction</h4>Port implantations at the forearm are associated with an increased risk of relevant vein thrombosis. Therefore, with this study we sought to identify the responsible risk factors to improve technical quality of the method.<h4>Methods</h4>This is a retrosp...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Jonathan Nadjiri, Tobias Geith, Tobias Waggershauser, Stephan Forster, Philipp Paprottka
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2021
Materias:	Medicine R Science Q
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/9efd56a8303f435fa7493755f3688a9a
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:9efd56a8303f435fa7493755f3688a9a
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:9efd56a8303f435fa7493755f3688a9a2021-12-02T20:13:28ZRisk factors assessment for radiographically guided port implantations with forearm access.1932-620310.1371/journal.pone.0259127https://doaj.org/article/9efd56a8303f435fa7493755f3688a9a2021-01-01T00:00:00Zhttps://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0259127https://doaj.org/toc/1932-6203<h4>Introduction</h4>Port implantations at the forearm are associated with an increased risk of relevant vein thrombosis. Therefore, with this study we sought to identify the responsible risk factors to improve technical quality of the method.<h4>Methods</h4>This is a retrospective analysis of 313 patients with port implantation at the forearm in 2019. Then, exploratory statistics were conducted comprising Cox-Regression and Kaplan-Meier-Analyses.<h4>Results</h4>Mean age was 60 ± 14 years. 232 (74%) of the patients were female. No early infection was observed. 29 late infections and 57 cases of thrombosis occurred. In only 9% of the patients with thrombosis hospital admission was necessary for treatment. Median interval to the diagnosis of thrombosis was 23 days; inter-quartile-range: 16-75. Mean interval to elective port explantation was 227 ± 128 days. There was no effect of occurrence of thrombosis of the interventionalist, the assistance nor of several technical aspects. However, there was a significantly lower risk of thrombosis for primary implanted port system compared to replacement ports, Hazard-ratio: 0.34 [Confidence interval: 0.172, 0.674], p = 0.002. Age was a significant risk factor for late infections, Hazard-ratio: 3.35 [Confidence interval:1.84, 6.07], p < 0.0001.<h4>Conclusion</h4>The main risk factor for adverse outcome after radiographically guided port implantation at the forearm is the type of the implanted port system. The reason for that might not be the material itself but the experience of a team with a certain port system. Age is a risk factor for late complications.Jonathan NadjiriTobias GeithTobias WaggershauserStephan ForsterPhilipp PaprottkaPublic Library of Science (PLoS)articleMedicineRScienceQENPLoS ONE, Vol 16, Iss 10, p e0259127 (2021)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	Medicine R Science Q
spellingShingle	Medicine R Science Q Jonathan Nadjiri Tobias Geith Tobias Waggershauser Stephan Forster Philipp Paprottka Risk factors assessment for radiographically guided port implantations with forearm access.
description	<h4>Introduction</h4>Port implantations at the forearm are associated with an increased risk of relevant vein thrombosis. Therefore, with this study we sought to identify the responsible risk factors to improve technical quality of the method.<h4>Methods</h4>This is a retrospective analysis of 313 patients with port implantation at the forearm in 2019. Then, exploratory statistics were conducted comprising Cox-Regression and Kaplan-Meier-Analyses.<h4>Results</h4>Mean age was 60 ± 14 years. 232 (74%) of the patients were female. No early infection was observed. 29 late infections and 57 cases of thrombosis occurred. In only 9% of the patients with thrombosis hospital admission was necessary for treatment. Median interval to the diagnosis of thrombosis was 23 days; inter-quartile-range: 16-75. Mean interval to elective port explantation was 227 ± 128 days. There was no effect of occurrence of thrombosis of the interventionalist, the assistance nor of several technical aspects. However, there was a significantly lower risk of thrombosis for primary implanted port system compared to replacement ports, Hazard-ratio: 0.34 [Confidence interval: 0.172, 0.674], p = 0.002. Age was a significant risk factor for late infections, Hazard-ratio: 3.35 [Confidence interval:1.84, 6.07], p < 0.0001.<h4>Conclusion</h4>The main risk factor for adverse outcome after radiographically guided port implantation at the forearm is the type of the implanted port system. The reason for that might not be the material itself but the experience of a team with a certain port system. Age is a risk factor for late complications.
format	article
author	Jonathan Nadjiri Tobias Geith Tobias Waggershauser Stephan Forster Philipp Paprottka
author_facet	Jonathan Nadjiri Tobias Geith Tobias Waggershauser Stephan Forster Philipp Paprottka
author_sort	Jonathan Nadjiri
title	Risk factors assessment for radiographically guided port implantations with forearm access.
title_short	Risk factors assessment for radiographically guided port implantations with forearm access.
title_full	Risk factors assessment for radiographically guided port implantations with forearm access.
title_fullStr	Risk factors assessment for radiographically guided port implantations with forearm access.
title_full_unstemmed	Risk factors assessment for radiographically guided port implantations with forearm access.
title_sort	risk factors assessment for radiographically guided port implantations with forearm access.
publisher	Public Library of Science (PLoS)
publishDate	2021
url	https://doaj.org/article/9efd56a8303f435fa7493755f3688a9a
work_keys_str_mv	AT jonathannadjiri riskfactorsassessmentforradiographicallyguidedportimplantationswithforearmaccess AT tobiasgeith riskfactorsassessmentforradiographicallyguidedportimplantationswithforearmaccess AT tobiaswaggershauser riskfactorsassessmentforradiographicallyguidedportimplantationswithforearmaccess AT stephanforster riskfactorsassessmentforradiographicallyguidedportimplantationswithforearmaccess AT philipppaprottka riskfactorsassessmentforradiographicallyguidedportimplantationswithforearmaccess
_version_	1718374781211901952

Risk factors assessment for radiographically guided port implantations with forearm access.

Ejemplares similares