EVALUATING THE RESULTS OF PLACING SUBCUTANEOUS INJECTION PORT UNDER THE GUIDANCE OF ULTRASOUND AND DIGITAL SUBTRACTION FOR CANCER PATIENTS AT MILITARY HOSPITAL 103
Main Article Content
Abstract
Object: To evaluate the results of placing subcutaneous injection port under the guidance of ultrasound and digital subtraction for cancer patients at military hospital 103. Subjects and research methods: Cross-sectional description, prospective study on 40 cancer patients who had subcutaneous injection chambers placed under the guidance of ultrasound and digital subtraction for cancer patients at military hospital 103 from January 2023 until December 2023. Results: The most common patients have colorectal cancer (42.5%), stage IV (52.5%) with disease duration ≥ 3 years (80%). Most patients had a subcutaneous injection chamber placed where the catheter entered the vessel lumen in the right internal jugular vein (96.2%). All patients (100%) had successful percutaneous needle insertion into the vein for the first time under ultrasound guidance. The majority of patients completed subcutaneous injection chamber placement under ultrasound guidance and background subtraction digitization within a period of 15-30 minutes (77.5%), the average time to perform the technique was 18.6 ± 5.9 minutes. The majority of patients who had subcutaneous injection chambers had no complications (87.5%). Conclusion: The most common patient has colorectal cancer, stage IV with disease duration ≥ 3 years. Most patients had a subcutaneous injection chamber placed where the catheter entered the vessel lumen in the right internal jugular vein. All patients had successful needle insertion through the skin into the vein for the first time under ultrasound guidance. The average time to perform the technique is 18.6 ± 5.9 minutes. Most patients have no complications or complications.
Article Details
Keywords
Subcutaneous injection port, Ultrasound, Digital subtraction, Cancer
References
2. Dridi M, Mejri N, Labidi S, et al. (2016). Implantable port thrombosis in cancer patients: a monocentric experience. Cancer Biol Med. 13(3):384–388.
3. Samad A, Ibrahim Y. (2015). Complications of Port A Cath implantation: A single institution experience. Egypt J Radiol Nucl Med, 4(46), 907–911.
4. Lê Vũ Linh và CS (2023), Hiệu quả kỹ thuật đặt đường truyền tĩnh mạch cảnh trong dưới hướng dẫn của siêu âm, Tạp chí y dược học Cần Thơ, Số 67/2023.
5. Lê Thanh Hải Đăng và cộng sự (2024) Vai trò của siêu âm hướng dẫn đặt catheter tĩnh mạch cảnh trong bằng cách tiếp cận theo trục dài, Tạp chí y häc Việt Nam, Tập 535 - tháng 2 – số 2 - 2024.
6. JianZhong M., Lijun J., Jianjun L., et al. (2014). Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing Ultrasound-Guided Procedure with the Seldinger’s Technique for Placement of Implantable Venous Ports. Cell Biochemistry and Biophysics volume 70, pages559–563.
7. Tivnan P, Nannery M, Epelboym Y, Vilvendhan R. (2022). Single center experience with ultrasound guided axillary vein port placement. The Journal of Vascular Access. 23(5):706-709.
8. Nguyễn Thị Thơ và cộng sự (2020), Thực trạng sử dụng buồng tiêm tĩnh mạch dưới da tại khoa ung thư Bệnh viện nhi trung ương, Bệnh viện nhi trung ương, 2023.