Purpose: This study evaluated the use of intravenous ports and provides a guide related to clinical decision making.
Methods: This study retrospectively reviewed 1505 patients who had received intravenous ports at Chang Gung Memorial Hospital in 2006. The relationships between the complications and entry routes were assessed. The intervention-free periods were also determined and compared. The patients were followed up until June 2010.
Results: Of the 1543 procedures performed, 412 were reinterventions to treat complications, most of which corresponded to fewer than 0.1 episodes per 1000 catheter-days; these were not associated with any particular entry route. There was a higher catheter fracture rate when the right subclavian vein was chosen as the entry vessel (p < 0.05). The intervention-free period ranged from 207 to 533 days.
Conclusion: The subclavian vein is not recommended for the use of intravenous ports. There is not only a higher risk of iatrogenic pneumothorax or hemothorax using this entry route but also a higher fracture rate, which may be caused by pinch-off syndrome. The greater saphenous vein should only be considered when the patient has superior vena cava syndrome. However, a higher incidence of infection and a lower device survival rate should be expected with this location.