Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Purpose:

To assess diagnostic efficacy/error to identify broken or dislocated totally implantable venous access device (TIVAD) fragments on radiological studies and to analyze interventional outcome of percutaneous retrieval.

Materials and methods:

Retrospective, single-center analysis of 27 patients, referred for percutaneous retrieval of embolized TIVAD fragments between 2000 and 2018. Demographic data, underlying disease, diagnostic studies, diagnostic error, interval between implantation and diagnosis of TIVAD-dysfunction, interval between diagnosis and retrieval, anatomical location of the embolized fragments, and technical aspects of retrieval procedure were identified from the patients’ electronic medical records.

Results:

Overall, diagnostic error was found in six patients (22%) with an average delay of 53 days. Ten fractures were caused during surgical removal, eleven fractures by pinching between first rib and clavicle and six cases by spontaneous disconnection between reservoir and catheter. Success rate of retrieval was 96% and the complication rate 0%.

Conclusion:

Fractured or retained TIVAD fragments were initially overlooked on radiological studies in more than 20% of patients. Percutaneous retrieval of broken and dislocated TIVAD fragments is very safe and highly successful.

Keywords

Retrieval complication error outcome radiological diagnosis interventional radiology oncology access techniques and procedures totally implantable venous access device

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Liu

Tseng

Chen

, et al. Percutaneous retrieval of 20 centrally dislodged Port-A catheter fragments. Clin Imaging 2004; 28: 223–229.

Önal

Coşkun

Karabulut

, et al. Interventional radiological retrieval of embolized vascular access device fragments. Diagn Interv Radiol 2012; 18: 87–91.

Woodhouse

Uberoi

Techniques for intravascular foreign body retrieval. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 2013; 36: 888–897.

Cahill

Ballah

Hernandez

, et al. Percutaneous retrieval of intravascular venous foreign bodies in children. Pediatr Radiol 2012;42(1): 24–31.

Wang

Liang

TH.

Percutaneous retrieval of dislodged central venous port catheter: experience of 25 patients in a single institute. Acta Radiol 2009; 50: 15–20.

Cheng

Tsai

Yang

, et al. Percutaneous retrieval of dislodged totally implantable central venous access system in 92 cases: experience in a single hospital. Eur J Radiol 2009; 69: 346–350.

Pokharel

Biswas

Tripathi

, et al. Missed central venous guide wires: a systematic analysis of published case reports. Crit Care Med 2015; 43(8): 1745–1756.

Kock

Pietsch

Krause

, et al. Implantable vascular access systems : experience in 1500 patients with totally implanted central port systems. World J Surg 1998; 22: 12–16.

Rossi

Rollandi

Ierardi

, et al. Materials and techniques for percutaneous retrieval of intravascular foreign bodies. J Vasc Access 2019; 20: 87–94.

10.

Bessoud

de Baere

Kuoch

, et al. Experience at a single institution with endovascular treatment of mechanical complications caused by implanted central venous access devices in pediatric and adult patients. Am J Roentgenol 2003; 180: 527–532.

11.

Fisher

Ferreyro

Evaluation of current techniques for nonsurgical removal of intravascular iatrogenic foreign bodies. Am J Roentgenol 1978; 130: 541–518.

12.

Wolf

Schernthaner

Dirisamer

, et al. Endovascular management of lost or misplaced intravascular objects: experience of 12 years. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 2008; 31: 563–568.

13.

Koseoglu

Parildar

Oran

, et al. Retrieval of intravascular foreign bodies with goose neck snare. Eur J Radiol 2004; 49: 281–285.

Diagnostic error in detection of fractured and migrated totally implantable venous access device fragments and experience with percutaneous retrieval: A report of 27 cases