Copyright
©The Author(s) 2023. Published by Baishideng Publishing Group Inc. All rights reserved.
World J Clin Cases. Jan 6, 2023; 11(1): 116-126
Published online Jan 6, 2023. doi: 10.12998/wjcc.v11.i1.116
Published online Jan 6, 2023. doi: 10.12998/wjcc.v11.i1.116
Impact of central venous port implantation method and access choice on outcomes
Ayhan Erdemir, Department of General Surgery, Anadolu Medical Center, Kocaeli 41400, Turkey
Huseyin Kemal Rasa, Department of General Surgery, Anadolu Medical Center Hospital, Kocaeli 41400, Turkey
Author contributions: Erdemir A contributed to the formal analysis of the data, investigation, writing of the original draft, and project administration; Erdemir A and Rasa HK contributed to the conceptualization of the study and methodology; Rasa HK contributed to the review and editing of the manuscript for important intellectual content; and all authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Institutional review board statement: The study was conducted following the Declaration of Helsinki (as revised in 2013) and was approved by the Anadolu Medical Center Hospital review board and ethics committee (ASM-EK-22/187).
Informed consent statement: Patients were not required to give informed consent to the study because the analysis used anonymous clinical data obtained after each patient agreed to treatment by written consent.
Conflict-of-interest statement: All the authors report no relevant conflicts of interest for this article.
Data sharing statement: The datasets analyzed during the current study are available in the hospital’s “electronic patient records” and from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
Open-Access: This article is an open-access article that was selected by an in-house editor and fully peer-reviewed by external reviewers. It is distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: https://creativecommons.org/Licenses/by-nc/4.0/
Corresponding author: Huseyin Kemal Rasa, MD, Attending Doctor, Department of General Surgery, Anadolu Medical Center Hospital, Cumhuriyet Mahallesi 2255 Sokak No. 3 Gebze, Kocaeli 41400, Turkey. kemrasa@gmail.com
Received: September 23, 2022
Peer-review started: September 23, 2022
First decision: November 11, 2022
Revised: November 24, 2022
Accepted: December 21, 2022
Article in press: December 21, 2022
Published online: January 6, 2023
Processing time: 103 Days and 23.2 Hours
Peer-review started: September 23, 2022
First decision: November 11, 2022
Revised: November 24, 2022
Accepted: December 21, 2022
Article in press: December 21, 2022
Published online: January 6, 2023
Processing time: 103 Days and 23.2 Hours
Core Tip
Core Tip: A total of 200 consecutive patients who had undergone central venous port implantation were assigned to two groups according to the access method: Jugular or subclavian veins. Our results firmly showed that the port occlusion rate was higher in the subclavian group. The jugular vein approach was also safer regarding port infections, fractures and pneumothorax risk. Contrary to the literature, our study also advocates a longer 2-mo interval for port care and washing. Our results set forth that the jugular vein route is safer than the subclavian vein for central venous port implantation.