Femoral placement of a totally implantable venous access port with spontaneous catheter fracture: case report

Tomohiro Kondo,Manabu Muto,Motoo Nomura,Keitaro Doi,Shigemi Matsumoto

doi:10.1186/s42155-019-0094-9

Tomohiro Kondo, Manabu Muto + Show 3 more

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.1186/s42155-019-0094-9

Copy DOI

Journal: CVIR endovascular	Publication Date: Jan 6, 2020
Citations: 2	License type: open-access

Affiliation: Kyoto University

Abstract

BackgroundThe incidence of catheter fracture after standard positioning of a totally implantable venous access port (TIVAP) is reported to be 1.1%–5.0%; however, the incidence of catheter fracture after TIVAP implantation at a femoral site remains unclear.Case presentationIn a 30-year-old man with angiosarcoma of the right atrium, tumor embolism was observed from the left brachiocephalic vein to the superior vena cava. A TIVAP was implanted in the right femur. A catheter fracture was spontaneously observed after 7 months.ConclusionsTo the best of our knowledge, this is the first case of catheter fracture in a TIVAP implantation at a femoral site.

Highlights

The incidence of catheter fracture after standard positioning of a totally implantable venous access port (TIVAP) is reported to be 1.1%–5.0%; the incidence of catheter fracture after TIVAP implantation at a femoral site remains unclear
To the best of our knowledge, here, we report the first case of angiosarcoma in a patient who developed a complication of spontaneous catheter fracture following TIVAP implantation in the femoral vein
To the best of our knowledge, this is the first case of catheter fracture occurring during femoral placement of TIVAP

Summary

Introduction

The incidence of catheter fracture after standard positioning of a totally implantable venous access port (TIVAP) is reported to be 1.1%–5.0%; the incidence of catheter fracture after TIVAP implantation at a femoral site remains unclear. In patients with central vein occlusions, bilateral breast cancer, infection, cutaneous metastasis, or radiogenic dermatitis, femoral placement of TIVAP is considered as an alternative implantation position (Almasi-Sperling et al 2016; Bertoglio et al 1996; Chen et al 2008; Goltz et al 2014; Kato et al 2016; Wolosker et al 2004). The incidence of catheter fracture in the patients with femoral placement of TIVAP has not been

Results

Conclusion