RoFo : Fortschritte auf dem Gebiete der Rontgenstrahlen und der Nuklearmedizin · 2013
[Experiences with power-injectable port systems: complications, patient satisfaction and clinical benefit].
Аннотация на английскомСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Chang D-H, Kabbasch C, Bovenschulte H, Libicher M, Maintz D, Bangard C
Аннотация
PURPOSE: Evaluation of complications, patient satisfaction and clinical benefit of port systems with authorization for high pressure injection of contrast agent during CT/MR examinations.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ultrasound-guided insertions of central venous port catheters were performed through the lateral subclavian vein at a university teaching hospital. The radiological information system (HIS/RIS) was used to evaluate technical success and complication rates. Assessment of patient satisfaction and clinical benefit was carried out by a questionnaire during a telephone call 6 months after implantation of the port system.
RESULTS: A total of 195 port systems in 193 patients were implanted. The catheter remained in place for a mean duration of 169 days (overall 29,210 catheter days). The technical success rate was 99.5 % and the overall complication rate was 17.4 % (24/138; 0.82 per 1000 catheter days). Follow-up revealed 13 early port explantations (9 %). Most of the patients reported high satisfaction in general (satisfied/very satisfied: 94 %). 34/209 contrast-enhanced CT/MRT scans (16 %) were performed using the port for contrast media injection. There were no complications during or after administration of contrast agent via the port system.
CONCLUSION: The Powerport system is a safe alternative for peripheral i. v. contrast media injection during CT/MR scans, but has been infrequently used. Most patients reported high overall satisfaction with the port system.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ultrasound-guided insertions of central venous port catheters were performed through the lateral subclavian vein at a university teaching hospital. The radiological information system (HIS/RIS) was used to evaluate technical success and complication rates. Assessment of patient satisfaction and clinical benefit was carried out by a questionnaire during a telephone call 6 months after implantation of the port system.
RESULTS: A total of 195 port systems in 193 patients were implanted. The catheter remained in place for a mean duration of 169 days (overall 29,210 catheter days). The technical success rate was 99.5 % and the overall complication rate was 17.4 % (24/138; 0.82 per 1000 catheter days). Follow-up revealed 13 early port explantations (9 %). Most of the patients reported high satisfaction in general (satisfied/very satisfied: 94 %). 34/209 contrast-enhanced CT/MRT scans (16 %) were performed using the port for contrast media injection. There were no complications during or after administration of contrast agent via the port system.
CONCLUSION: The Powerport system is a safe alternative for peripheral i. v. contrast media injection during CT/MR scans, but has been infrequently used. Most patients reported high overall satisfaction with the port system.