Author:
Shan Jing,Lv Sumei,Li Haihong,Wang Donglai,Zhang Xiaoyu,Liu Wei
Abstract
Abstract
Background
We aimed to compare the effects of peripherally inserted central catheters (PICC) and implantable venous access devices (TIVADs) in terms of complications and shoulder function in patients with malignant bone and soft tissue tumors of the lower extremities.
Methods
We analyzed 65 cases of TIVADs (chest wall) and 65 cases of PICC at the orthopedic department of the Fourth Hospital of Hebei Medical University between June 2019 and December 2021, which were diagnosed with malignant bone tumors or soft tissue tumors of the lower extremities (tumors had to be relatively sensitive to chemotherapy), received regular chemotherapy, with ≥ 14 cycles (42 weeks). The two groups were compared in terms of catheter indwelling time, catheter-related complications, Constant-Murley shoulder function score, and displacement of the position of the catheter end on the catheterization side.
Results
Compared to the PICC group, at six months after catheterization, the TIVADs group reported better outcomes for catheter indwelling time, catheter-related complications, and Constant-Murley score for the catheterization-side shoulder joint (p < 0.05). The TIVADs group also reported less displacement of the catheter end position after 180° abduction of the catheterization-side shoulder joint (p < 0.05).
Conclusions
Compared with PICC, TIVADs can prolong catheter indwelling time, reduce catheter-related complications, and maintain shoulder joint function, which makes it an ideal venous-access approach when providing chemotherapy to patients with malignant bone and soft tissue tumors of the lower extremities.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Orthopedics and Sports Medicine,Rheumatology
Reference35 articles.
1. Chen X-P, Jian-Ping WANG. ZHAO Ji-zong. The ninth edition. Beijing: People’s Medical Publishing House; 2018. pp. 770–9.
2. Xu Hairong N, Xiaohui L, Yuan, et al. Clinical analysis of 9200 primary malignant bone tumors in Beijing jishuitan hospital. Chin J orthopaedic clinic & research. 2016;1(1):51–4. https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn
3. den Hollander D, Van der Graaf W, Fiore M, et al. Unravelling the heterogeneity of soft tissue and bone sarcoma patients’ health-related quality of life: a systematic literature review with focus on tumour location. ESMO Open. 2020. 5(5): e000914.
4. Paolo DTA, Fleur W, Abbas A et al. Datasets for reporting of the Soft Tissue Sarcoma: recommendations from the International Collaboration on Cancer Reporting (ICCR). HISTOPATHOLOGY. 2023.
5. Hashimoto K, Nishimura S, Oka N, Akagi M. Clinical features and outcomes of primary bone and soft tissue sarcomas in adolescents and young adults. Mol Clin Oncol. 2020;12(4):358–64.