RESUMO
Background: The presence of totally implantable venous access devices (TIVADs), as any permanent or semipermanent medical devices, has an impact on the quality of life (QoL) of patients. Therefore, the purpose of this trial was to evaluate the efficacy of psychological support for patients undergoing this procedure. Methods: This randomized controlled trial (RCT) aimed to compare the efficacy of a psychological intervention vs. standard care on QoL in patients receiving TIVAD for chemotherapy treatment (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02075580). The trial was conducted at the Veneto Institute of Oncology IOV-IRCCS (Padua, Italy) between October 2013 and September 2018. Participants were neoplastic adults receiving TIVAD for chemotherapy treatment for any cancer, not undergoing visible demolitive interventions, without psychopathological diagnosis and language understanding. The exclusion criteria were patients without a diagnosis of cancer, with psychopathological diagnosis, or with language misunderstanding. Results: The variation of C30-QL2 and BR32-BI was not statistically different between intervention and control arms in men and women. However, the variation of C30-SF was statistically better in the intervention than control arm in men [mean difference (MD) 22.3, 95% CI 3.5 to 41.0] but not in women (MD -2.7, 95% CI -24.0 to 18.7). The variations of the other secondary outcome measures were not statistically different between intervention and control arms. Conclusion: Psychological support did not show any clear advantages on global QoL and body image perception in patients at 15 days after TIVAD insertion for chemotherapy. In contrast, male patients might benefit from even a very short psychological counseling before or during chemotherapy even if they do not seem to ask for it.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of totally implanted vascular devices (TIVAD) using different techniques of insertion. METHODS: We performed a retrospective study using a prospective collected database of 796 consecutive oncological patients in which TIVADs were inserted. We focused on early and late complications following different insertion techniques (surgical cutdown, blind and ultrasound guided percutaneous) according to different techniques. RESULTS: Ultrasound guided technique was used in 646 cases, cephalic vein cutdown in 102 patients and percutaneous blind technique in 48 patients. The overall complication rate on insertion was 7.2% (57 of 796 cases). Early complications were less frequent using the ultrasound guided technique: arterial puncture (p = 0.009), technical failure (p = 0.009), access site change after first attempt (p = 0.002); pneumothorax occurred in 4 cases, all using the blind percutaneus technique. Late complications occurred in 49 cases (6.1%) which required TIVAD removal in 43 cases and included: sepsis (29 cases), thrombosis (3 cases), dislocation (7 cases), skin dehiscence (3 cases), and severe pain (1 case). CONCLUSION: Ultrasound guided technique is the safest option for TIVAD insertion, with the lowest rates of immediate complications.
