Eventi e formazione
line
PICC o port, qual è il dispositivo migliore per i pazienti con cancro?
line
Facebook LinkedIn Emailline
Contattaci

PICC o port, qual è il dispositivo migliore per i pazienti con cancro?

La scelta del dispositivo di accesso vascolare (VAD) è fondamentale nell’oncologia. I professionisti in oncologia devono considerare più fattori. Diverse opzioni comportano diversi vantaggi e potenziali complicanze. Il Prof. Baudolino Mussa dell’Università di Torino ha affrontato questi argomenti durante una conferenza intitolata “La scelta appropriata del dispositivo nel paziente oncologico: revisione della letteratura e sondaggio 2019” organizzata per il Multidisciplinary Advanced Course on Vascular Access (MACOVA) 2020 tenutosi ad Edimburgo, Regno Regno.

Dai Port ai PICC

I farmaci oncologici e l’accesso venoso centrale sono stati sviluppati dopo la fine della seconda guerra mondiale1. Il port è stato inventato intorno al 19701. I cateteri centrali inseriti perifericamente (PICC) sono disponibili dagli anni ’70, ma il loro utilizzo è aumentato in modo significativo dal 2000 per diversi motivi2:

Registrati per leggere l'articolo completo e accedere al video

Avete dimenticato la password?
Non siete ancora registrati? Iscriviti

#complication #CVC #implantedport #oncology #PICC #vascularaccess


Riferimenti

This list of references to third party peer reviewed material and the sites they are hosted on are provided for your reference and convenience only, and do not imply any review or endorsement of the material or any association with their operators.  The Third Party References (and the Web sites to which they link) may contain information that is inaccurate, incomplete, or outdated. Your access and use of the Third Party Sites (and any Web sites to which they link) is solely at your own risk.

This presentation was developed by the presenter, and the findings, interpretations, and conclusions contained or expressed with it do not necessarily reflect the views of BD. To the extent this presentation relates to specific products, such products should always be used in accordance with the relevant instructions for use and other product documentation. This content should not be copied or distributed without the consent of the copyright holder. For further information, please contact: GMB-EU-MDS@bd.com

References

  1. Mussa B. The appropriate choice of device in the oncology patient: review of the literature and survey 2019. Presented at: Multidiscliplinary Advanced Course on Vascular Access (MACOVA) 2020; 15 January, 2020; Edinburgh, United Kingdom.
  2. Cotogni P, Barbero C, Garrino C, et al. Peripherally inserted central catheters in non-hospitalized cancer patients: 5-year results of a prospective study. Support Care Cancer. 2015;23(2):403-409.
  3. Chopra V, Anand S, Krein SL, Chenoweth C, Saint S. Bloodstream infection, venous thrombosis, and peripherally inserted central catheters: reappraising the evidence. Am J Med. 2012;125(8):733-741.
  4. Saber W, Moua T, Williams EC, et al. Risk factors for catheter-related thrombosis (CRT) in cancer patients: a patient-level data (IPD) meta-analysis of clinical trials and prospective studies. J Thromb Haemost. 2011;9(2):312-319.
  5. Campagna S, Gonella S, Berchialla P, et al. Can Peripherally Inserted Central Catheters Be Safely Placed in Patients with Cancer Receiving Chemotherapy? A Retrospective Study of Almost 400,000 Catheter-Days. Oncologist. 2019;24(9):e953-e959.
  6. Campagna S, Gonella S, Zerla PA, et al. The Risk of Adverse Events Related to Extended-Dwell Peripheral Intravenous Access. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2018;39(7):875-877.

Approbation Number: BD-19023