Prospective Assessment of Catheter Migration in Implanted Vascular Access Devices for Adjuvant Colorectal Cancer Chemotherapy

Pia Osterlund, Päivi Valta, Sören Bondedstam, Leena Lindgren

Department of Anaesthesia, Tampere University Hospital and University of Tampere, Tampere, Finland..
Department of Anaesthesiology, Helsinki University Central Hospital, Jorvi Hospital, Espoo, Finland.
Department of Oncology, Helsinki University Central Hospital and University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
Department of Radiology, Helsinki University Central Hospital, Helsinki, Finland.

DOI: 10.4236/jct.2012.326118                

Abstract

Background: Chemotherapy in colorectal cancer is usually administered as continuous infusion of 5-fluorouracil, often in combination with oxaliplatin or irinotecan. Targeted drugs are most efficient and tolerable in conjunction with continuous infusion dosing. Implanted venous access devices (VAD) are the prerequisite for continuous infusion administration. The reported catheter migration frequency with VAD is 0% - 3.5%. The purpose of this case-control study was to evaluate the predisposing factors of catheter migration. Methods: We inserted VADs in 88 radically operated colorectal cancer patients randomized to adjuvant 48-hour-infusion chemotherapy repeated every 14 days, altogether 12 times over 24 weeks. Three out of 88 patients (3.4%) had a symptomatic catheter migration from the superior caval vein into the internal jugular vein. The fourth case had chemotherapy for osteosarcoma. These 4 cases were compared with 12 controls from the same 88 patient study population, matched for age, sex, body mass index (BMI), physical activity level and right subclavian insertion site. Tip position, port model, complications, catheter length and material was studied. The post insertion catheter tip position in the chest X-ray was numbered from 1 (in subclavia) to 8 (in atrium). Results: The four cases, all male, had a median position of 3 (range 3 - 4) and controls 6 (range 4 - 8), P = 0.004, median difference 3 (CI95% 1 - 5). At notification of migration the patients had experienced discomfort in the neck region starting 5 to15 days before at strenuous upper extremities activity with Valsalva maneuvers. Conclusion: Optimal catheter tip position when sitting is in the right atrium or low in the superior vena cava to avoid migration. Patients with VADs should avoid strenuous activity with Valsalva maneuvers.

Keywords

Central Venous Catheterization; Catheter Migration; Complication; Colorectal Cancer; Vascular Access Device

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

[1]	D. M. Parkin, F. Bray, J. Ferlay and P. Pisani, “Global Cancer Statistics, 2002,” CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians, Vol. 55, No. 2, 2005, pp. 74-108. doi:10.3322/canjclin.55.2.74
[2]	A. de Gramont, A. Figer, M. Seymour, et al., “Leucovorin and Fluorouracil with or without Oxaliplatin as First-Line Treatment in Advanced Colorectal Cancer,” Journal of Clinical Oncology, Vol. 18, No. 16, 2000, pp. 2938-2947.
[3]	J. Y. Douillard, D. Cunningham, A. D. Roth, et al., “Irinotecan Combined with Fluorouracil Compared with Fluorouracil Alone as First-Line Treatment for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Multicentre Randomised Trial,” Lancet, Vol. 355, No. 9209, 2000, pp. 1041-1047. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(00)02034-1
[4]	H. Kock, M. Pietsch, U. Krause, H. Wilke and F. Eigler, “Implantable Vascular Access Systems: Experience in 1500 Patients with Totally Implanted Central Venous Port Systems,” World Journal of Surgery, Vol. 22, No. 1, 1998, pp. 12-16. doi:10.1007/s002689900342
[5]	J. M. Davies and R. M. Goldberg, “Treatment of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer,” Seminars in Oncology, Vol. 38, No. 4, 2011, pp. 552-560. doi:10.1053/j.seminoncol.2011.05.009
[6]	K. M. Tveit, T. Guren, B. Glimelius, et al., “Phase IIII Trial of Cetuximab with Continuous or Intermittent Fluorouracil, Leucovorin, and Oxaliplatin (Nordic Flox) versus Flox Alone in First-Line Treatment of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: The Nordic-Vii Study,” Journal of Clinical Oncology, Vol. 30, No. 15, 2012, pp. 1755-1762. doi:10.1200/JCO.2011.38.0915
[7]	T. S. Maughan, R. A. Adams, C. G. Smith, et al., “Addition of Cetuximab to Oxaliplatin-Based First-Line Combination Chemotherapy for Treatment of Advanced Colorectal Cancer: Results of the Randomised Phase 3 Mrc Coin Trial,” Lancet, Vol. 377, No. 9783, 2011, pp. 2103-2114. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(11)60613-2
[8]	J. Y. Douillard, S. Siena, J. Cassidy, et al., “Randomized, Phase III Trial of Panitumumab with Infusional Fluorouracil, Leucovorin, and Oxaliplatin (Folfox4) versus Folfox4 Alone as First-Line Treatment in Patients with Previously Untreated Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: The Prime Study,” Journal of Clinical Oncology, Vol. 28, No. 31, 2010, pp. 4697-4705. doi:10.1200/JCO.2009.27.4860
[9]	E. Van Cutsem, C. H. Kohne, E. Hitre, et al., “Cetuximab and Chemotherapy as Initial Treatment for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer,” The New England Journal of Medicine, Vol. 360, No. 14, 2009, pp. 1408-1417. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa0805019
[10]	L. Schulmeister, “Management of Non-Infectious Central Venous Access Device Complications,” Seminars in Oncology Nursing, Vol. 26, No. 2, 2010, pp. 132-141. doi:10.1016/j.soncn.2010.02.003
[11]	M. Lorenz, C. Hottenrott, R. M. Seufert and A. Encke, “A Totally Implantable Permanent Central Venous Access, Long-Term Experience with Subcutaneous Infusion Chambers (German),” Langenbeck’s Archives of Surgery, Vol. 373, No. 5, 1988, pp. 302-309. doi:10.1007/BF01276546
[12]	R. Poorter, F. Lauw, W. Bemelman, et al., “Complications of an Implantable Venous Access Device (Port-a-Cath) During Intermittent Continuous Infusion of Chemotherapy,” European Journal of Cancer, Vol. 13, No. 1996, pp. 2262-2266.
[13]	B. Yung, I. A. Cambell, J. S. Elborn, J. S. Harvey and D. J. Shale, “Totally Implantable Venous Access Devices in Adult Patients with Cystic Fibrosis,” Respiratory Medicine, Vol. 90, No. 1996, pp. 353-356.
[14]	R. Schwarz, J. Groeger and D. Coit, “Subcutaneously Implanted Central Venous Access Devices in Cancer Patients: A Prospective Analysis,” Cancer, Vol. 79, No. 8, 1997, pp. 1635-1640. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1097-0142(19970415)79:8<1635::AID-CNCR30>3.0.CO;2-X
[15]	L. Laurenzi, C. Fimiani, S. Natoli, et al., “Complications with Fully Umplantable Venous Access Systems in Oncologic Patients,” Tumori, Vol. 82, No. 1996, pp. 232-236.
[16]	M. Hollyoak, T. Ong and J. Leditschke, “Critical Appraisal of Surgical Venous Access in Children,” Pediatric Surgery International, Vol. 12, No. 2-3, 1997, pp. 177-182. doi:10.1007/BF01349993
[17]	P. Craft, J. May, A. Dorigo, C. Hoy and A. Plant, “Hickman Catheters: Left-Sided Insertion, Male Gender, and Obesity Are Associated with an Increased Risk of Complications,” Australian and New Zealand Journal of Medicine, Vol. 26, No. 1, 1996, pp. 33-39. doi:10.1111/j.1445-5994.1996.tb02904.x
[18]	P. Carde, M. Cosset-Delaigue, A. Laplanche and I. Chareau, “Classical External Indwelling Central Venous Catheter versus Totally Implanted Venous Access Systems for Chemotherapy Administration: A Randomized Trial in 100 Patients with Solid Tumors,” European Journal of Cancer and Clinical Oncology, Vol. 25, No. 6, 1989, pp. 939-944. doi:10.1016/0277-5379(89)90151-X
[19]	P. Osterlund, T. Ruotsalainen, R. Korpela, et al., “Lactobacillus Supplementation for Diarrhoea Related to Chemotherapy of Colorectal Cancer: A Randomised Study,” British Journal of Cancer, Vol. 97, No. 8, 2007, pp. 1028-1034. doi:10.1038/sj.bjc.6603990
[20]	G. Nazarian, H. Bjarnason, C. Dietz, Jr., C. Bernadas and D. Hunter, “Changes in Tunneled Catheter Tip Position When a Patient Is Upright,” Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology, Vol. 8, No. 3, 1997, pp. 437-441. doi:10.1016/S1051-0443(97)70585-2
[21]	L. Bishop, L. Dougherty, A. Bodenham, et al., “Guidelines on the Insertion and Management of Central Venous Access Devices in Adults,” International Journal of Laboratory Hematology, Vol. 29, No. 4, 2007, pp. 261-278. doi:10.1111/j.1751-553X.2007.00931.x
[22]	J. Petersen, J. Delaney, M. Brakstad, R. Rowbotham and C. Bagley, Jr., “Silicone Venous Access Devices Positioned with Their Tips High in the Superior Vena Cava Are More Likely to Malfunction,” The American Journal of Surgery, Vol. 178, No. 1, 1999, pp. 38-41. doi:10.1016/S0002-9610(99)00124-5
[23]	T. M. Vesely, “Central Venous Catheter Tip Position: A Continuing Controversy,” Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology, Vol. 14, No. 5, 2003, pp. 527-534. doi:10.1097/01.RVI.0000071097.76348.72
[24]	G. Stanislav, R. Fitzgibbons, Jr., R. Bailey, Jr., et al., “Reliability of Implantable Central Venous Access De- vices in Patients with Cancer,” Archives of Surgery, Vol. 122, No. 11, 1987, pp. 1280-1283. doi:10.1001/archsurg.1987.01400230066012
[25]	C. Kowalski, J. Kaufman, S. Rivitz, S. Geller and A. Waltman, “Migration of Central Venous Catheters: Implications for Initial Catheter Tip Positioning,” Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology, Vol. 8, No. 3, 1997, pp. 443-447.
[26]	R. DeChicco, D. L. Seidner, C. Brun, et al., “Tip Position of Long-Term Central Venous Access Devices Used for Parenteral Nutrition,” Journal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition, Vol. 31, No. 5, 2007, pp. 382-387. doi:10.1177/0148607107031005382
[27]	P. Rasuli, D. Hammond and I. Peterkin, “Spontaneous Intrajugular Migration of Long-Term Central Venous Access Catheters,” Radiology, Vol. 182, No. 3, 1992, pp. 822-824.
[28]	M. Binnebosel, J. Grommes, K. Junge, et al., “Internal Jugular Vein Thrombosis Presenting as a Painful Neck Mass Due to a Spontaneous Dislocated Subclavian Port Catheter as Long-Term Complication: A Case Report,” Cases Journal, Vol. 2, No. 7991, 2009, p. 7991. doi:10.4076/1757-1626-2-7991