Comparison of radiologically inserted arm ports versus surgically placed chest ports for chemotherapy.

Abstract

Aim: Central venous access ports (CVAP) are often required to deliver chemotherapy to cancer patients. Arm-sited CVAP are an alternative to traditional chest-sited CVAP, but their durability and complication rates have not been thoroughly compared.

Methods: A retrospective analysis at a single institution was conducted of all patients who had a chest port inserted for chemotherapy over a 30-month period and compared to patients who had an arm port inserted over a subsequent 30-month period. The minimum follow-up period in patients who did not die from cancer was 6 months. The primary endpoint was successful use of the port, defined as a patient completing chemotherapy without a complication prompting removal of the port.

Results: The success rate was not significantly different between arm port (92 patients) or chest port (49 patients) groups (88 vs 92%). There were no significant differences between infective or thrombotic complications in the two groups.

Conclusion: Arm CVAP were found to be equivalent in durability and complications compared to chest CVAP for chemotherapy administration at a regional oncology unit.