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

Abstract

AbstractAim: 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.