Open Journal of Surgery
Safety, risk of complications and the functional feasibility among different kinds of central venous access are still a matter of debate.Not many clinical trials have reported a comparison of complications and patency of CVCs versus Peripherally Inserted Catheters (PICC)as central venous access for indoor patients with advanced gastrointestinal disorder. The aim of the present study was to compare CVCs and PICCs regarding function, complications and convenience in a controlled clinical study on patients aimed for oncology surgery aimed for cure. Distributions of patients were comparable. Malignant diagnoses were signifi cantly higher among CVC-patients. CVCs and PICCs were used for treatment during equal number of days, without any signifi cant complication rates and with comparable number of days on antibiotics and other potent drugs. The overall cumulative hazard (risk) for treatment interruptions, due to either full-fi lled clinical indications or due to any complication among the subgroups of patients did not differ. Central Venous Catheter and Peripheral Inserted Central Venous Catheter, for central venous access, did not differ among consecutive unselected patients with serious gastro-intestinal disorders.
★
★
★
★
★
83 views • 6 slides
