Performance of a hybrid central venous catheter utilized for both peripheral blood stem cell harvest and transplant support of patients undergoing autologous peripheral blood stem cell transplantation.
ABSTRACT Patients undergoing autologous peripheral blood stem cell transplantation (PBSC) frequently require the sequential insertion of two central venous catheters, one for leukapheresis and one for transplant support. Hybrid catheters suitable for leukapheresis and long-term use have been increasingly used, but there is limited information regarding their performance and complication rate. The purpose of this study was to determine the performance of the Pheres-Flow hybrid catheter when utilized for both leukapheresis and transplant support, with particular emphasis on the incidence of infectious and occlusive complications. We prospectively analyzed the performance of 92 catheters in 82 consecutive patients who underwent autologous peripheral blood stem cell (PBSC) transplantation. Occlusion was the most frequent complication of this catheter with 29% of the patients experiencing difficulty drawing blood or infusing fluids. Infection was another frequent complication. Twenty-two percent of patients developed catheter-related bloodstream infections and 15 catheters had to be removed because of proven or suspected infection that did not respond to antibiotic therapy. Nevertheless, 77% of patients were able to complete leukapheresis and transplant support with only one catheter. We conclude that the utilization of the Pheres-Flow catheter for both leukapheresis and transplant support is feasible, but that new strategies need to be developed to decrease the incidence of occlusive and infectious complications of hybrid catheters.
- [show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Despite the increased availability of vascular access devices, there is limited information regarding their pattern of use in the clinical setting or the criteria used for their utilization. To obtain this information, we sent questionnaires to MASCC members. Forty-five percent of the respondents stated that the decision to use vascular access devices depended on the drugs used at the beginning of therapy. Another 30% replied that the decision to use long-term vascular access devices depended on the status of the patient's veins at the beginning of therapy. Only 12% of those surveyed waited until all the veins were exhausted before considering using vascular access devices. Although more than half of the professionals surveyed used long-term vascular access devices in 50% or more of their patients with hematologic malignancies, only 20% used these devices in patients with solid tumors. Features considered most important when selecting long-term vascular access devices were durability of the device and ease of use for medical personnel. Major limitations of long-term vascular access devices were cost, closely followed by patient acceptance. The most common reasons for removal of vascular access devices were infection and thrombosis. We conclude that there is a lack of uniform criteria for the utilization of long-term vascular access devices. Cost is a major limitation to the wider use of this technology. More research is necessary to determine the optimal use of vascular access devices in patients with cancer.Supportive Care Cancer 02/1998; 6(1):13-9. · 2.65 Impact Factor
- [show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Autologous peripheral blood progenitor cell (PBPC) transplantation frequently requires sequential placement and use of two separate central venous catheters: (1) a short-term, large-bore, stiff device inserted for leukapheresis, and after removal of that device, (2) a long-term, multi-lumen, flexible, Silastic catheter for administration of high-dose chemotherapy, re-infusion of hematopoietic cells, and intensive supportive care. We reviewed our recent experience with two dual-lumen, large-bore, Silastic multi-purpose ('hybrid') catheters, each of which can be used as a single device for both leukapheresis and long-term supportive care throughout the transplant process. Quinton-Raaf PermCath and Bard-Hickman hemodialysis/apheresis dual-lumen catheters were used as the sole venous access device in 112 consecutive patients who underwent autologous PBPC collection and transplantation. The catheter exit site was monitored three times a week, and lumen patency was assessed using clinical and radiologic techniques. Catheters were removed prematurely for persistent thrombus, positive blood cultures despite appropriate antibiotics, or mechanical dysfunction. There were no intra-operative or immediate post-operative complications relating to insertion. Thirty-two patients experienced catheter occlusion necessitating urokinase instillation. Persistent occlusive problems were noted in 16 patients, and in 10 patients the catheter had to be removed. Two exit site infections and 17 bacteremias occurred. Catheters had to be removed for persistent infection in two subjects and for mechanical problems in five others. Cost analysis comparing the hybrid catheters alone vs conventional devices revealed a charge of $4230 in patients with hybrid catheters vs. $7530 in those requiring a temporary non-Silastic dialysis catheter in addition to a flexible, long-term Silastic catheter. Hybrid, Silastic, dual-lumen, large-bore central venous catheters are safe, cost-effective and convenient multi-purpose venous access devices that may be used in the setting of autologous PBPC collection and transplantation. The rate of thrombotic, infectious and mechanical complications appears comparable to other central venous access devices.Bone Marrow Transplantation 05/2000; 25(7):779-85. · 3.54 Impact Factor
- [show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The purpose of this study was to review the incidence and type of complications associated with the insertion and use of central venous catheters for leukapheresis and high-dose chemotherapy with stem cell rescue. One hundred sixty-seven central venous catheters placed either at the transplant center or by various community surgeons were studied for insertion complications, inability to perform leukapheresis and incidence of infection. The overall incidence of hemo- or pneumothorax was 3.6%. Inability to pherese occurred in 13% of catheters placed by outside surgeons and 6.5% of catheters inserted at the transplant institution. Most often, these were due to malposition of the catheter too high in the superior vena cava or in other veins. Deep venous thrombosis was often related to this malposition and occurred in 4.8% of all patients. Pulmonary embolism was not seen in these patients despite the fact the catheters were often left in place during the thrombotic episode. Early or late-onset infections occurred in 6.5% of patients and were most often exit site infections. The incidence of complications of pheresis catheters is high but might be reduced by more attention to proper placement of the catheter closer to the right atrial/superior vena cava junction, and limiting insertion to a cadre of surgeons familiar with leukapheresis requirements.Supportive Care Cancer 06/1997; 5(3):223-7. · 2.65 Impact Factor