A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Conversion from cephalic vein to external jugular vein: success rate increased on totally implantable access ports with cut-down method. | LitMetric

Background: Totally implantable access ports (Port-A) can be inserted using 2 techniques: cut-down and percutaneous. The cut-down method is safer than the percutaneous method. However, the cut-down method has a higher failure rate. We report an alternative method to decrease the failure rate of the cut-down method.

Patients And Methods: In all, 758 cases of Port-A implantation with cephalic vein cut-down were tried, and 56 cases failed. Of the 56 cases, 29 cases were converted to the percutaneous subclavian method (group A), and 27 cases were converted to the external jugular vein cut-down method (group B). The patient's characteristics, causes of failure of cephalic vein cut-down, operating time, and complications were compared.

Results: The failure rate of cephalic vein cut-down was 7.4%. The causes of failure of cephalic vein cut-down are described. There were 4 complications in group A, including one pneumothorax (1/29), one fracture of the catheter (1/29), one embolization of the catheter (1/29), and one hematoma formation in the port site (1/29); 2 complications occurred in group B, including one embolization of the catheter (1/27) and one hematoma in the port site (1/27). The total complications were 17.7%.

Conclusion: Conversion to external jugular vein cut-down is safely and easily applied in cases of cephalic vein cut-down failure. This method did not take more time than the percutaneous subclavian method. However, placement of the port should be made more carefully to prevent angulation of the catheter. We provide an alternative method to deal with failure of cephalic vein cut-down.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1553350613479178DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

vein cut-down
32
cephalic vein
28
cut-down method
16
cut-down
13
external jugular
12
jugular vein
12
failure rate
12
failure cephalic
12
vein
10
method
10

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!