Seldinger Technique Versus Venous Cut-Down for Placement of Totally Implantable Venous Access Ports

Sponsor
University of Zurich (Other)
Overall Status
Completed
CT.gov ID
NCT00272623
Collaborator
(none)
152
1
33
4.6

Study Details

Study Description

Brief Summary

Since the first placement of a totally implantable venous access port (TIVAP) by Niederhuber et al in 1982 its application to provide long-term central venous access has dramatically increased. These systems have dramatically simplified the administration of chemotherapy and parenteral nutrition as well as the repetitive collection of blood samples.

Initial retrospective studies have focused on the complications associated with different implantation techniques. Subsequently, major attention has been payed to the comparison of distinct types of TIVAPs. To date a variety of approved port systems are available. These devices can be either implanted using the Seldinger technique or by venous cut-down of the cephalic vein Despite the global use of these established implantation procedures prospective, randomized trials directly comparing these two approaches are still lacking. So, the choice, which technique to use is left to the surgeon's preference.

The aim of this study is to directly compare the Seldinger technique versus cephalic vein cut down for placement of TIVAPs in respect of implantation success rate, operation time and perioperative morbidity.

Condition or Disease Intervention/Treatment Phase
  • Procedure: Seldinger technique or venous cut-down for port placement
N/A

Detailed Description

Since the first placement of a totally implantable venous access port (TIVAP) by Niederhuber et al in 1982 its application to provide long-term central venous access has dramatically increased. These systems have dramatically simplified the administration of chemotherapy and parenteral nutrition as well as the repetitive collection of blood samples.

Initial retrospective studies have focused on the complications associated with different implantation techniques. Subsequently, major attention has been payed to the comparison of distinct types of TIVAPs. To date a variety of approved port systems are available. These devices can be either implanted using the Seldinger technique or by venous cut-down of the cephalic vein Despite the global use of these established implantation procedures prospective, randomized trials directly comparing these two approaches are still lacking. So, the choice, which technique to use is left to the surgeon's preference.

The aim of this study is to directly compare the Seldinger technique versus cephalic vein cut down for placement of TIVAPs in respect of implantation success rate, operation time and perioperative morbidity.

After an informed consent has been obtained, patients will be randomized as follows: By means of sealed envelopes a total of 152 patients will be allocated either to TIVAP placement using Seldinger technique or by venous cut down (n= 76 in each group).

Operations will be performed in local or general anaesthesia either on an outpatient basis or via 24h-admission. Changes of technique due to catheter implantation failure, operation time and intraoperative complications will be assessed during the procedure. Postoperative examination will be standardized in both groups, i.e. chest radiography (to confirm catheter placement and to exclude pneumothorax) as well as final clinical examination at discharge or before patient transfer.

Study Design

Study Type:
Interventional
Actual Enrollment :
152 participants
Allocation:
Randomized
Intervention Model:
Parallel Assignment
Masking:
Single
Primary Purpose:
Treatment
Official Title:
A Prospective, Randomized Trial Comparing Seldinger Technique Versus Venous Cut-Down for Placement of Totally Implantable Venous Access Ports
Study Start Date :
Jan 1, 2006
Actual Primary Completion Date :
Oct 1, 2008
Actual Study Completion Date :
Oct 1, 2008

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcome Measures

  1. Implantation success rate []

Secondary Outcome Measures

  1. Amount of puncture attempts needed (new perforation of the skin) []

  2. Intraoperative change of surgical technique []

  3. Operation time []

  4. Intra-/perioperative complications (arterial puncture, major arrhythmia, pneumothorax, haemorrhage/haematoma) []

Eligibility Criteria

Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study:
18 Years and Older
Sexes Eligible for Study:
All
Accepts Healthy Volunteers:
No
Inclusion Criteria:
  • Oncological patients with an indication for a long-term parenteral treatment

  • Age > 18 years

  • Elective operations only

Exclusion Criteria:
  • Patients with limited German proficiency (informed consent not possible)

  • Anticoagulation (INR >2.5), coagulopathy, Tc<60'000/mI

  • Bilateral intervention/irradiation on shoulder, clavicle or breast

Contacts and Locations

Locations

Site City State Country Postal Code
1 Dept. of Visceral and Transplantation Surgery Zurich ZH Switzerland 8091

Sponsors and Collaborators

  • University of Zurich

Investigators

  • Principal Investigator: Markus Weber, MD, Dept. of Visceral and Transplantation Surgery, University Hospital Zurich

Study Documents (Full-Text)

None provided.

More Information

Publications

None provided.
Responsible Party:
, ,
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier:
NCT00272623
Other Study ID Numbers:
  • StV 33-2005
First Posted:
Jan 6, 2006
Last Update Posted:
Jun 3, 2009
Last Verified:
Jun 1, 2009

Study Results

No Results Posted as of Jun 3, 2009