Journals / Türk Göğüs Kalp Damar Cerrahisi Dergisi / 2012 / Cilt: 20 - Sayı: 1

Our experiences with chemotherapy port catheter

Kemoterapi port kateteri deneyimlerimiz

Pages
69–71
Publication Date
2022-09-02
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Conclusion: Chemotherapy port catheter implantation provides a comfortable treatment option for the patients receiving chemotherapy and despite the complications that may develop, it should be the method of choice.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Background: This study aims to evaluate our port catheter procedures in patients who were going to receive chemotherapy.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Methods: Patients (48 females, 32 males; mean age 49.5 years; range 33 to 75 years) who received chemotherapy port catheters at the Cardiovascular Surgery Department of Evliya Çelebi State Hospital between July 2007 and July 2008 were investigated.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Conclusion: Chemotherapy port catheter implantation provides a comfortable treatment option for the patients receiving chemotherapy and despite the complications that may develop, it should be the method of choice.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2007 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Background: This study aims to evaluate our port catheter procedures in patients who were going to receive chemotherapy. Methods: Patients (48 females, 32 males; mean age 49.5 years; range 33 to 75 years) who received chemotherapy port catheters at the Cardiovascular Surgery Department of Evliya Çelebi State Hospital between July 2007 and July 2008 were investigated. Results: The chemotherapy port catheters were implanted due to breast cancer (n=4; 5%), lung cancer (n=11; 13.7%), stomach cancer (n=4; 5%) and bowel cancer (n=41; 51.2%). The mean normal healing time was 8.9 days. Conclusion: Chemotherapy port catheter implantation provides a comfortable treatment option for the patients receiving chemotherapy and despite the complications that may develop, it should be the method of choice.

Özet

Amaç: Bu çalışmada, kemoterapi tedavisi alacak hastalarda kemoterapi port kateteri uygulamalarımız değerlendirildi. Çalışma planı: Evliya Çelebi Devlet Hastanesi, Kalp ve Damar Cerrahisi Kliniği’nde Temmuz 2007 - Temmuz 2008 tarihleri arasında kemoterapi port kateteri uygulanan 80 hasta (48 kadın, 32 erkek; ort. yaş 49.5 yıl; dağılım 33-75 yıl) incelendi. Bulgular: Kemoterapi port kateteri, meme kanseri (n=24; %30), kolon kanseri (n=41; %51.2), akciğer kanseri (n=11; %13.7) ve mide kanseri (n=4; %5) nedeniyle implante edildi. Ortalama yara iyileşme süresi 8.9 gün idi. Sonuç: Kemoterapi alacak hastalarda kemoterapi port kateteri uygulaması, tedavi alması açısından konforlu bir uygulamadır ve uygulama esnasında oluşabilecek komplikasyonlara rağmen tercih edilmesi gereken bir yöntemdir.

🔖

Cite This Article

AKSOY, A., MAVİOĞLU, L. (2022). Our experiences with chemotherapy port catheter. Türk Göğüs Kalp Damar Cerrahisi Dergisi, Cilt: 20 - Sayı: 1, 69–71. https://ajindex.com/articles/424648

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (7)

  1. Kelseka E, Güldoğuş F. Vasküler port uygulamalarımızın retrospektif değerlendirmesi. International Journal of Hematology and Ocology 2005;15:195-8
  2. Cil BE, Canyiğit M, Peynircioğlu B, Hazirolan T, Carkaci S, Cekirge S, et al. Subcutaneous venous port implantation in adult patients: a single center experience. Diagn Interv Radiol 2006;12:93-8
  3. Samancı T, Molinas Mendel N, Bozkurt A.K, Kutlu F, Uras C. 115 Kanser hastasında port komplikasyonlarının değerlendirilmesi. Cerrahpaşa J Med 2004;35:71-7
  4. Ballarini C, Intra M, Pisani Ceretti A, Cordovana A, Pagani M, Farina G, et al. Complications of subcutaneous infusion port in the general oncology population. Oncology 1999;56:97-102
  5. Schwarz RE, Groeger JS, Coit DG. Subcutaneously implanted central venous access devices in cancer patients: a prospective analysis. Cancer 1997;79:1635-40
  6. Barrios CH, Zuke JE, Blaes B, Hirsch JD, Lyss AP. Evaluation of an implantable venous access system in a general oncology population. Oncology 1992;49:474-8
  7. Hájek R, Sevcík P, Ondrásek J, Mayer J, Vásová I, Král Z, et al. Subcutaneous chamber systems (ports) for long-term care in cancer patients. Vnitr Lek 1995;41:21-7. [Abstract]