Spina Gp

Complications of Subcutaneous Infusion Port in the General Oncology Population

Subcutaneous infusion ports (SIPs) represent a valid method for long-term chemotherapy. The SIPs have several advantages over other methods of venous access: they are easy to implant under local anaesthesia, have less discomfort for the patients, allow low costs, can be implanted in day hospital, and can be managed ambulatorily. However, SIPs have delayed complications, frequently related to clinical conditions of the neoplastic patients, and immediate complications, often due to the placement technique. From March 1992 to March 1997 we placed, under local anaesthesia and under fluoroscopic control, 102 SIPs in 99 general oncology patients for long-term chemotherapy (88% solid, 12% haematological tumours). The percutaneous venous access devices were in the subclavian vein in 96% of the cases and in the internal jugular vein in 4% of them. Immediate complications were: 1 haemopneumothorax, which required thoracic aspirations and two blood transfusions, 1 loop of the tunneled part of the catheter without alterations in SIP function, and 1 left jugular thrombosis in a patient with subclavian veins already thrombosed. The venous access was in the subclavian vein in the first 2 cases, and it was not necessary to suspend the therapeutic program. In the third instance, implanted in jugular vein, it was necessary to remove the SIP. Delayed complications were: 1 necrosis of the skin over the port, 1 infection of subcutaneous pocket, 2 infections of the system, 1 catheter deconnection, and 3 catheter ruptures with embolization of the catheter tip. The SIPs were removed in all cases but 1 in whom infection was successfully treated by appropriate antibiotic therapy. Embolization of the catheter required removal from the pulmonary artery under fluoroscopic guidance in the cardiac catheterization laboratory. In conclusion, infection and thrombosis are the two major complications of SIP in general oncology patients. In these cases it is not necessary to remove systematically the system, but a cor rect therapy (antibiotic, fibrinolytic agents) can be utilized with good results. The catheter rupture is often due to the wear over the costoclavicular angle. The interventional radiology is the method of choice in the treatment of the catheter embolization by rupture or dislocation. The experience of the surgical and nursing staff is probably the most important factor in decreasing the total rate of complications.

Distal spleno-renal shunt versus endoscopic sclerotherapy in the prevention of variceal rebleeding A meta-analysis of 4 randomized clinical trials

Meta-analysis was used to evaluate 4 clinical trials comparing distal spleno-renal shunt (DSRS) with endoscopic sclerotherapy (EVS) in the prevention of variceal rebleeding: the interval between bleeding and therapy ranges from < 14 days to > 100 days. A questionnaire was sent to each author of the published trials concerning methods, definitions and results of the trials in order to obtain more detailed and up-to-date information. The selected end-points for the meta-analysis were: rebleeding, mortality and chronic encephalopathy. Analysis of the results in the questionnaires was made using the method proposed by Collins. The pooled relative risk (i.e. the combined Odds ratio of each trial as an estimate of overall efficacy) of rebleeding was statistically reduced by DSRS (0.16; 95% confidence interval 0.10-0.27). Despite this, the overall risk of death following DSRS was only marginally decreased (0.78; 95% confidence interval 0.47-1.29); the lack of homogeneity in the results does not permit any significant conclusions on this end-point. However, in non-alcoholic patients, the decrease in risk of death was greater, and this without heterogeneity, following DSRS than EVS (0.59; 95% confidence interval 0.23-1.50). The overall risk of chronic encephalopathy was slightly increased after DSRS (1.86; 95% confidence interval 0.90-3.86). In conclusion, DSRS significantly reduced the risk of rebleeding compared to EVS without increasing the risk of chronic hepatic encephalopathy. However, DSRS did not significantly affect the overall death risk. Only in non-alcoholic disease did it seem to show an advantage over EVS.

Distal splenorenal shunt versus endoscopic sclerotherapy in the prevention of variceal rebleeding. First stage of a randomized, controlled trial.

In 1984 we started a prospective controlled trial comparing endoscopic sclerotherapy (ES) with the distal splenorenal shunt (DSRS) in the elective treatment of variceal hemorrhage in cirrhotic patients. The study population included 40 patients with cirrhosis and portal hypertension referred to our department from October 1984 to March 1988. These patients were drawn from a pool of 173 patients who underwent either elective surgery or endoscopic sclerotherapy during this time. Patients were assigned to one of the two groups according to a random-number table: 20 to DSRS and 20 to ES. During the postoperative period, no DSRS patient died, while one ES patient died of uncontrolled hemorrhage. One DSRS patient had mild recurrent variceal hemorrhage despite an angiographically patent DSRS. Four ES patients suffered at least one episode of gastrointestinal bleeding: two from varices and two from esophageal ulcerations. Five ES patients developed transitory dysphagia. Long-term follow-up was complete in all patients. Two-year survival rates for shunt (95%) and ES (90%) groups were similar. One DSRS patient rebled from duodenal ulcer, while three ES patients had recurrent bleeding from esophagogastric sources (two from varices and one from hypertensive gastropathy). One DSRS and two ES patients have evolved a mild chronic encephalopathy; four DSRS and two ES patients suffered at least one episode of acute encephalopathy. Two ES patients had esophageal stenoses, which were successfully dilated. Preliminary data from this trial seem to indicate that DSRS, in a subgroup of patients with good liver function and a correct portal-azygos disconnection, more effectively prevents variceal rebleeding than ES. However no significant difference in the survival of the two treatment groups was noted.

Surgical and Radiologic Treatment of Primary Budd-Chiari Syndrome

Abstract. Budd-Chiari syndrome (BCS) is an uncommon form of portal hypertension caused by obstruction of the hepatic venous outflow. From 1969 to 1997 we treated 19 patients (7 men, 12 women; mean age 37.6 years) affected by primary BCS. In most of the cases no etiologic factors were identified; in the remaining cases the etiology was associated with polycythemia vera, use of oral contraceptives, presence of endoluminal membranes, and repeated episodes of sepsis. Three patients with membranous occlusion of the major hepatic veins were treated by percutaneous placement of a self-expanding metallic stent inserted via a transjugular or transhepatic approach. The remaining 16 patients underwent a side-to-side portacaval shunt, which required interposition of a graft in five cases. In two patients with a significant caval obstruction, a metallic vascular stent was placed in the narrowed tract of the inferior vena cava, before shunting, by means of a transfemoral venous approach. One patient died within the first 30 postoperative days. The 18 survivors were followed for a mean of 66.7 months. The 5-year survival was 83%. Primary BCS requires different therapies depending on the stage of the disease. The fulminant or chronic forms with irreversible hepatic damage require definitive treatment, such as orthotopic liver transplantation. For the acute or subacute forms, characterized by reversible hepatic injury, a portasystemic shunt represents the most effective treatment. The patients at poor hepatic risk can be treated by interventional radiology. In both cases preliminary caval stenting is necessary if the syndrome is complicated by significant obstruction of the inferior vena cava.

Selective distal splenorenal shunt versus side-to-side portacaval shunt. Clinical results of a prospective, controlled study.

A prospective, controlled study comparing the clinical results of the selective distal splenorenal shunt procedure and the side-to-side portacaval shunt procedure was undertaken in 1980. Ninety-three cirrhotic patients with previous episodes of bleeding from esophageal varices underwent a distal splenorenal shunt procedure (47 patients). The operative mortality rate was 2 percent in both groups. The intraoperative decrease of portal hypertension after the portacaval shunt procedure was higher than after the distal splenorenal shunt procedure (p less than 0.05), and in those with patent shunts, there was a 0 percent incidence of early variceal rebleeding after the portacaval shunt procedure compared with a 9 percent incidence after the distal splenorenal shunt procedure (p less than 0.05). Both shunts, however, had similarly satisfactory results in preventing long-term variceal rebleeding (portacaval shunt 2 percent and distal splenorenal shunt 0 percent). Postoperative ascites was more common after the distal splenorenal shunt procedure (58 percent versus 24 percent; p less than 0.01). Analysis of actuarial survival curves showed no difference between the two procedures. The incidences of long-term episodes of chronic encephalopathy were not statistically different after both procedures. The only three instances of severe encephalopathy occurred in patients with the portacaval shunt (p less than 0.05). The distal splenorenal shunt also seemed to have a less negative effect on postoperative liver function than the portacaval shunt. These data suggest that the selective shunt should be viewed as a first choice strategy in the treatment of portal hypertension.