Low-dose apixaban or rivaroxaban as secondary prophylaxis of upper extremity deep vein thrombosis.

Upper extremity deep vein thrombosis (UEDVT) may occur without inciting factor or may be secondary to malignancy, surgery, trauma, central venous catheter or related to thoracic outlet syndrome (TOS). International guidelines recommend anticoagulant treatment for at least three months, in particular the use of vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) and direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs). No data on extended anticoagulant therapy and reduced dose of DOACs have been reported in patients affected by UEDVT with persistent thrombotic risk (active cancer, major congenital thrombophilia) or without affected vein recanalization. In our retrospective observational study, including 43 patients, we treated secondary UEDVT with DOACs. In the acute phase of thrombosis (median time of 4 months), we used therapeutic dose of DOACs; the 32 patients with permanent thrombotic risk factors or without recanalization of the UEDVT were shifted to low-dose DOACs (apixaban 2.5 mg twice daily or rivaroxaban 10 mg daily). During therapy with full-dose DOACs, 1 patient presented recurrence of thrombosis; no thromboembolic events were observed during treatment with low-dose DOACs. During full-dose treatment, 3 patients presented minor hemorrhagic complications; no hemorrhagic events were observed during DOACs at low dose. We think our preliminary data could support the indication to extend the anticoagulation with dose reduction of DOACs in patients affected by UEDVT and no-transient thrombotic risk. These data should be confirmed in randomized controlled prospective study.

The anticoagulants rivaroxaban and low molecular weight heparin prevent PICC-related upper extremity venous thrombosis in cancer patients.

Peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) is often applied in chemotherapy patients and commonly causes upper extremity venous thrombosis (UEVT), which should be prevented.To assess the preventive effects of the anticoagulants rivaroxaban and low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) on UEVT in patients receiving chemotherapy through PICCs.A total of 423 chemotherapy patients with continuous PICC use between January 2014 and June 2015 at the Oncology Department of Dongying People's Hospital were divided into 3 groups: rivaroxaban (10 mg/day, orally), LMWH (Enoxaparine, 4000 anti-Xa IU/day, subcutaneous injection), and control (no anticoagulant). UEVT incidence and other complications during PICC use were observed and recorded.The rivaroxaban, LMWH, and control groups included 138 (79 males; 54.9 ±â€Š11.0 years), 144 (76 males; 56.0 ±â€Š10.9 years), and 141 (71 males; 53.3 ±â€Š10.9 years) patients, (P = .402 and P = .623 for age and sex respectively). There were no differences in cancer location (P = .628), PICC implantation site (P > .05), body mass index (BMI) (P = .434), blood pressure (all P > .05), blood lipids (5 laboratory parameters included, all P > .5), smoking (P = .138), history of lower limb venous thrombosis (P = .082), and 10 other associated comorbidities (all P > .5). Twenty-nine patients withdrew from the study (5 from the rivaroxaban, 12 from the LMWH, and 12 from the control groups, respectively), and 394 patients were analyzed. There were significant differences in the rivaroxaban group and the LMWH group compared to the control group (P = .010 and P = .009, respectively), but no significant difference was observed between the rivaroxaban group and the LMWH group (P = .743).Anticoagulants such as rivaroxaban and LMWH may reduce the incidence of PICC-related UEVT in patients receiving chemotherapy.

Thrombosis in the setting of cancer.

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common cause of adverse outcomes in patients with cancer. The risk of VTE varies with cancer type, stage and grade, cancer therapy, and supportive care, as well as patient characteristics including age, ethnicity, and inherited and acquired comorbid conditions. VTE prophylaxis should be provided to all hospitalized cancer patients and high-risk outpatients. Low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) remains the first-line therapy for VTE in patients with active cancer. Anticoagulation should be continued as long as there is evidence of active disease or patients are receiving cancer treatment. The efficacy of direct oral anticoagulants in the treatment of cancer-associated thrombosis remains incompletely defined. Central venous catheter (CVC)-associated VTE should be treated with anticoagulation alone, unless the CVC is no longer required. Recent studies indicate that anticoagulation may be appropriate for patients with persistent thrombocytopenia or solid tumor brain metastases. Management of recurrent VTE includes the identification of the cause(s) of the recurrence and solutions targeted at addressing the potential precipitants.

Concentrated citrate locking in order to reduce the long-term complications of central venous catheters: a randomized controlled trial in patients with hematological malignancies.

PURPOSE AND METHODS: Central venous catheter (CVC)-related thrombosis and infections are frequently occurring complications in patients with hematological malignancies. At present, heparin is most often used as a locking solution. Trisodium citrate (TSC) had been shown to be a very effective antimicrobial catheter locking in hemodialysis patients. We performed a prospective randomized phase III multicenter trial to determine the efficacy of TSC as a locking solution compared to heparin in preventing CVC-related thrombosis and infections in patients with hematological malignancies. RESULTS: Thirty-four episodes of CVC-related bloodstream infections (CVC-BSI) occurred in the 108 patients who were randomized to locking with heparin compared with 35 episodes in the 99 patients who were randomized to locking with TSC (P = 0.654). We did find seven times more CVC-BSI with gram-negative rods in CVCs locked with heparin (P = 0.041). The cumulative incidence of symptomatic thrombosis was 10% in the heparin group and 5% in the TSC group (hazard ratio 0.525; 95% confidence interval 0.182-1.512). CONCLUSION: This study shows that locking with TSC in patients with hematological malignancies significantly reduced the incidence of CVC-BSI with gram-negative rods. However, the incidence of CVC-BSI with coagulase-negative staphylococcus or CVC-related thrombosis was not reduced by TSC locking.

Infections increase the risk of central venous catheter-related thrombosis in adult acute myeloid leukemia.

INTRODUCTION: Central venous catheters (CVC) related thrombosis (CRT) represents a well known complication in patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) receiving intensive chemotherapy but the efficacy of antithrombotic prophylaxis still remains controversial. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We analyzed 71 consecutive AML patients whose CVC was inserted before each chemotherapy cycle for an overall number of 106 CVC placements. In 47/106 insertions, a prophylaxis with 100 IU/kg/day low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) was administered for 7 days after CVC insertion and additional 7 after CVC removal. This unconventional dose of LMWH, although higher than usual, appeared adequate for a short-course approach. LMWH was delivered regardless of the platelet (PLT) count once provided that it should have been maintained above 20 x 10(9)/L by transfusions. RESULTS: Of 106 insertions, we observed 19 (18%) episodes of CRT, 58 (54%) of sepsis and 50 (47%) infections of CVC-exit site with no difference between LMWH and no-LMWH group. Occurrence of CRT was significantly associated with CVC-exit site infections (14/19, p=0.01) and sepsis (16/19, p=0.005) with no difference between LMWH and no-LMWH group. In multivariate analysis, both CVC-exit site infections and sepsis were confirmed to be independent risk factors for CRT development. CONCLUSION: Our retrospective study, although based on a small sample size, suggests that the occurrence of CVC-exit site infections and neutropenic sepsis following chemotherapy significantly increases the risk of CRT in AML, independently from the use of LMWH prophylaxis.

Prophylaxis of catheter-related deep vein thrombosis in cancer patients with low-dose warfarin, low molecular weight heparin, or control: a randomized, controlled, phase III study.

PURPOSE: Whether an anticoagulant prophylaxis is needed for patients with cancer with a central venous catheter is a highly controversial subject. We designed a study to compare different prophylactic strategies over 3 months of treatment. METHODS: We performed a phase III prospective, open-label randomized trial. After the insertion of a central venous access device, consecutive patients with planned chemotherapy for cancer were randomized to no anticoagulant prophylaxis, low molecular weight heparin [low molecular weight heparin (LMWH); with isocoagulation doses], or warfarin 1 mg/day. Treatments were given over the first 3 months. Doppler ultrasound and venographies were performed on days 1 and 90, respectively, or sooner in case of clinical presumption of thrombosis. RESULTS: A total of 420 patients were randomized, and 407 were evaluable. Forty-two catheter-related deep vein thrombosis (DVT) occurred (10.3 %), 20 in those with no anticoagulation, 8 in those receiving warfarin, and 14 in those receiving LMWH. Nine additional non-related catheter deep vein thrombosis (CDVT) occurred. Anticoagulation significantly reduced the incidence of catheter-related DVT (p = 0.035) and catheter non-related DVT (p = 0.007), with no difference between warfarin and LMWH. Safety was good (3.4 % of attributable events) but compliance with randomized prophylaxis was lower than expected. CONCLUSIONS: Prophylaxis showed a benefit regarding catheter-related and non-catheter-related DVT with no increase in serious side effects.

Females with subclavian vein thrombosis may have an increased risk of hypercoagulability.

BACKGROUND: Subclavian vein thrombosis (SVT) is usually caused by vigorous activity or extensive use of the upper extremity. Patients are tested for hypercoagulability if they present with a spontaneous clot unassociated with such activity. The objective of this study was to determine the prevalence of hypercoagulability in patients undergoing first rib resection and scalenectomy presenting with SVT. METHODS: Using a prospectively maintained database from August 2003 through June 2011, patients were retrospectively reviewed for hypercoagulability testing and clinical outcomes. RESULTS: One hundred forty-three patients (79 females and 64 males; mean [range] age, 32 [16-71] years) presented with SVT, of whom 55 patients (43 females and 12 males; mean age, 32 [16-61] years) had undergone hypercoagulable testing. Fourteen patients (25.5%) (12 females and 2 males; mean age, 27 [16-46] years) had an abnormal hypercoagulable profile. A factor V Leiden mutation was present in 6 patients, protein S deficiency in 4, a plasminogen-activator inhibitor-1 (PAI-1) deficiency in 2, and 1 patient each with protein C deficiency, anticardiolipin antibodies, factor VII mutation, factor II mutation, and antiphospholipid antibodies. Immediate and long-term postoperative vein patency was similar to patients without hypercoagulability. Patients were placed on lifelong anticoagulation therapy if they had a PAI-1, protein C, or protein S deficiency. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with hypercoagulability do as well with first rib resection and scalenectomy for SVT as those without hypercoagulability. In our patient subset, more females were tested owing to a history of spontaneous thrombosis and an increased incidence of hypercoagulable disorders. Because of our findings, we believe younger women with SVT should undergo hypercoagulable testing to identify the need for long-term anticoagulation therapy.

International clinical practice guidelines for the treatment and prophylaxis of thrombosis associated with central venous catheters in patients with cancer.

BACKGROUND: Although long-term indwelling central venous catheters (CVCs) may lead to pulmonary embolism (PE) and loss of the CVC, there is lack of consensus on management of CVC-related thrombosis (CRT) in cancer patients and heterogeneity in clinical practices worldwide. OBJECTIVES: To establish common international Good Clinical Practices Guidelines (GCPG) for the management of CRT in cancer patients. METHODS: An international working group of experts was set up to develop GCPG according to an evidence-based medicine approach, using the GRADE system. RESULTS: For the treatment of established CRT in cancer patients, we found no prospective randomized studies, two non-randomized prospective studies and one retrospective study examining the efficacy and safety of low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) plus vitamin K antagonists (VKAs). One retrospective study evaluated the benefit of CVC removal and two small retrospective studies were on thrombolytic drugs. For the treatment of symptomatic CRT, anticoagulant treatment (AC) is recommended for a minimum of 3 months; in this setting, LMWHs are suggested. VKAs can also be used, in the absence of direct comparisons of these two types of anticoagulants in this setting [Guidance]. The CVC can be kept in place if it is functional, well-positioned and non-infected and there is good resolution under close surveillance; whether the CVC is kept or removed, no standard approach in terms of AC duration has been established [Guidance]. For the prophylaxis of CRT in cancer patients, we found six randomized studies investigating the efficacy and safety of VKA vs. placebo or no treatment, one on the efficacy and safety of unfractionnated heparin, six on the value of LMWH, one double-blind randomized and one non randomized study on thrombolytic drugs and six meta-analyses of AC and CVC thromboprophylaxis. Type of catheter (open-ended like the Hickman(®) catheter vs. closed-ended catheter with a valve like the Groshong(®) catheter), its position (above, below or at the junction of the superior vena cava and the right atrium) and method of placement may influence the onset of CRT on the basis of six retrospective trials, four prospective non-randomized trials, three randomized trials and one meta-analysis. In light of these data: use of AC for routine prophylaxis of CRT is not recommended [1A]; a CVC should be inserted on the right side, in the jugular vein, and distal extremity of the CVC should be located at the junction of the superior vena cava and the right atrium [1A]. CONCLUSION: Dissemination and implementation of these international GCPG for the prevention and treatment of CRT in cancer patients at each national level is a major public health priority, needing worldwide collaboration.

Posterior sternoclavicular dislocation presenting with upper-extremity deep vein thrombosis.

Posterior sternoclavicular dislocation is an uncommon injury and often remains initially undiagnosed due to variable clinical presentation and inadequate visualization of the joint on plain radiographs. It is frequently associated with serious and life-threatening injuries involving the trachea, esophagus, or great vessels. A 15-year-old boy was knocked to the ground during wrestling and landed on his left shoulder. He presented 6 days after trauma with increasing arm swelling and pain. A Doppler ultrasound revealed deep vein thrombosis involving the left shoulder and arm. Contrast-enhanced computed tomography of the chest confirmed the diagnosis of left posterior sternoclavicular dislocation with the medial end of left clavicle compressing the underlying brachiocephalic vein. Venous duplex scan confirmed acute venous thrombosis of the left jugular and subclavian veins. Open reduction of the left posterior sternoclavicular dislocation was performed under general anesthesia with cardiothoracic surgery backup. The reduced joint was stable, negating the need for internal fixation. Postoperatively, the pain and arm swelling gradually subsided, and patient recovered well with no complications. Deep vein thrombosis has not been reported as a presenting symptom for posterior sternoclavicular dislocation. Orthopedic, trauma, and thoracic surgeons should be aware of this presentation and obtain a chest computed tomography scan with 3-dimensional reconstruction to confirm the diagnosis. In cases of posterior sternoclavicular dislocation with vascular compromise, patients should immediately undergo open reduction with or without internal fixation.

Risk factors, management and primary prevention of thrombotic complications related to the use of central venous catheters.

An adequate vascular access is of importance for the treatment of patients with cancer and complex illnesses in the intensive, perioperative or palliative care setting. Deep vein thrombosis and thrombotic occlusion are the most common complications attributed to central venous catheters in short-term and, especially, in long-term use. In this review we will focus on the risk factors, management and prevention strategies of catheter-related thrombosis and occlusion. Due to the lack of randomised controlled trials, there is still controversy about the optimal treatment of catheter-related thrombotic complications, and therapy has been widely adopted using the evidence concerning lower extremity deep vein thrombosis. Given the increasing use of central venous catheters in patients that require long-term intravenous therapy, the problem of upper extremity deep venous thrombosis can be expected to increase in the future. We provide data for establishing a more uniform strategy for preventing, diagnosing and treating catheter-related thrombotic complications.

Diagnosis prevention and treatment for PICC-related upper extremity deep vein thrombosis in breast cancer patients.

AIM: To study the incidence, diagnosis, prevention and treatment of peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC)-related upper extremity deep vein thrombosis (DVT) in breast cancer patients using a PICC catheter for chemotherapy. METHODS: The data of the incidence, diagnosis and treatment of PICC-related upper extremity DVT in 187 breast cancer patients using a PICC catheter for chemotherapy, from August 2009 to July 2011 were retrospectively analyzed. RESULTS: In total 188 PICC were inserted between August 2009 and July 2011 and followed up for a total of 14 399 catheter-days (median placement, 76.6 days; range, 1 to 170 days). Four (2.1%) of 188 PICC were removed as a result of PICC-related upper extremity DVT in 14 to 112 catheter-days, at a rate of 0.28/1000 catheter-days. CONCLUSION: The use of PICCs in breast cancer patients for chemotherapy is safe and effective. However, some patients may develop catheter-related upper extremity DVT. In order to minimize complications, we should pay attention to its early symptoms and signs, as well as the timely removal of the catheter and appropriate anti-coagulant treatment.

Epidemiology and prevention of catheter-related thrombosis in patients with cancer.

Central venous catheters are extensively used in patients with cancer to secure delivery of chemotherapy and facilitate phlebotomy. Unfortunately, considerable morbidity can result from early complications or late sequelae, ranging from arterial puncture, pneumothorax and bloodstream infections to catheter-related thrombosis (CRT). Contemporary studies have shown that the incidence of symptomatic CRT is ∼5%, whereas the incidence of asymptomatic CRT is higher, at 14-18%. The significance and mechanisms of catheter design, material, insertion location and technique, position of the catheter tip and other risk factors in contributing to the development of CRT are not well understood. Efforts to reduce thrombotic complications, involving flushing the catheter with heparinized solutions, the use of heparin-bonded catheters, and systemic anticoagulant prophylaxis, have been largely ineffective. More studies are needed to understand the pathophysiology of thrombotic complications, to help identify effective interventions to reduce this adverse outcome.

Characterization of central venous catheter-associated deep venous thrombosis in infants.

PURPOSE: Deep venous thrombosis (DVT) is a frequent complication in infants with central venous catheters (CVCs). We performed this study to identify risk factors and risk-reduction strategies of CVC-associated DVT in infants. METHODS: Infants younger than 1 year who had a CVC placed at our center from 2005 to 2009 were reviewed. Patients with ultrasonically diagnosed DVT were compared to those without radiographic evidence. RESULTS: Of 333 patients, 47% (155/333) had femoral, 33% (111/333) had jugular, and 19% (64/333) had subclavian CVCs. Deep venous thromboses occurred in 18% (60/333) of patients. Sixty percent (36/60) of DVTs were in femoral veins. Femoral CVCs were associated with greater DVT rates (27%; 42/155) than jugular (11%; 12/111) or subclavian CVCs (9%; 6/64; P < .01). There was a 16% DVT rate in those with saphenofemoral Broviac CVCs vs 83% (20/24) in those with percutaneous femoral lines (P < .01). Multilumen CVCs had higher DVT rates than did single-lumen CVCs (54% vs 6%, P < .01), and mean catheter days before DVT diagnosis was shorter for percutaneous lines than Broviacs (13 ± 17 days vs 30 ± 37 days, P = .02). Patients with +DVT had longer length of stay (86 ± 88 days vs 48 ± 48 days, P < .01) and higher percentage of intensive care unit admission (82% vs 70%, P = .02). CONCLUSIONS: Deep venous thrombosis reduction strategies in infants with CVCs include avoiding percutaneous femoral and multilumen CVCs, screening percutaneous lines, and early catheter removal.

Profilaxia medicamentosa da trombose venosa profunda em pacientes submetidos à cirurgia do trauma em um hospital universitário / Drug prophylaxis of deep venous thrombosis in patients submitted to trauma surgery in a university hospital

CONTEXTO: Anualmente, milhões de pessoas são vítimas de trauma no mundo. Além de suas consequências sociais e econômicas, muitos dos pacientes necessitam de tratamento cirúrgico, gerando, portanto, maiores riscos à vida. O tromboembolismo venoso, consequência da trombose venosa profunda, é uma importante causa de morbimortalidade em pós-operatórios e pode ser evitado com profilaxia adequada. OBJETIVO: Avaliar a utilização da profilaxia medicamentosa para trombose venosa profunda em pacientes submetidos à cirurgia do trauma de emergência, em um hospital-escola. MÉTODOS: Estudo transversal analítico, com 153 pacientes internados no Hospital Universitário Cajuru, em Curitiba, no Paraná, durante dois meses. Foram analisados prospectivamente prontuários de pacientes que necessitaram de cirurgia devido a trauma. O estudo incluiu pacientes classificados como alto e médio risco para trombose venosa profunda e avaliou-se a realização, ou não, da profilaxia medicamentosa. A análise estatística foi feita de forma descritiva. RESULTADOS: Dos 153 pacientes incluídos no estudo, 99 (64,7%) foram classificados como alto risco para trombose venosa e 54 (35,3%) como médio, sendo que 144 (94%) não receberam profilaxia medicamentosa. Dos nove (6%) pacientes que receberam profilaxia medicamentosa, um foi estratificado como médio risco e os outros oito de alto risco. Dos pacientes que receberam profilaxia, em apenas quatro a orientação foi adequada. CONCLUSÕES: A profilaxia para trombose venosa não é realizada de maneira rotineira nos pacientes de médio e alto risco para trombose venosa profunda que são submetidos à cirurgia do trauma e, quando realizada, muitas vezes é inadequada.

BACKGROUND: Annually, millions of people are victims of trauma around the world. Besides the social and economic consequences caused by it, many of these patients need surgical treatment, thus generating greater risk to life. Venous thromboembolism, a consequence of deep vein thrombosis, represents a major cause of the morbidity and mortality in postoperative state, and it could be avoided with adequate prophylaxis. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the use of chemoprophylaxis for deep vein thrombosis, in patients undergoing emergency trauma surgery in a teaching hospital. METHODS: A cross-sectional analytic study was conducted with 153 patients admitted to Cajuru University Hospital, in Curitiba, Paraná, in a two-month period. Records of patients who required surgery due to trauma were prospectively analyzed. The study included those classified as high and medium risk for deep vein thrombosis. Then, it was identified whether or not the drug prophylaxis was used. A statistical analysis was descriptively performed. RESULTS: Of the 153 patients included, 99 (64.7%) were classified as high risk for deep vein thrombosis and 54 (35.3%) as medium risk. Of the total, 144 (94%) did not receive prophylaxis and nine (6%) did. On those who received prophylaxis, only four patients received the adequate. CONCLUSIONS: Prophylaxis of venous thrombosis disease is not performed routinely in patients of medium and high risk of developing deep vein thrombosis, who underwent trauma surgery. And, when performed, it is often inappropriate.

Risk factors for upper extremity venous thrombosis associated with peripherally inserted central venous catheters.

PURPOSE: To identify clinically important risk factors associated with upper extremity venous thrombosis following peripherally inserted central venous catheters (PICC). METHODS: A retrospective case control study of 400 consecutive patients with and without upper extremity venous thrombosis post-PICC insertion was performed. Patient data included demographics, body mass index (BMI), ethnicity, site of insertion, size and lumen of catheter, internal length, infusate, and co-morbidities, such as diabetes mellitus, congestive heart failure, and renal failure. Additional risk factors analyzed were active cancer, any history of cancer, recent trauma, smoking, a history of prior deep vein thrombosis, and recent surgery, defined as surgery within three months prior to PICC insertion. RESULTS: The prevalence of trauma, renal failure, and infusion with antibiotics and total parenteral nutrition (TPN) was higher among patients exhibiting upper extremity venous thrombosis (UEVT), when compared to controls. Patients developing UEVT were also more likely to have PICC line placement in a basilic vein and less likely to have brachial vein placement (P<.001). Left-sided PICC line sites also posed a greater risk (P=.026). The rate of standard DVT prophylaxis with low molecular weight heparin and unfractionated heparin and the use of warfarin was similar in both groups. Average length of hospital stay was almost double among patients developing UEVT, 19.5 days, when compared to patients undergoing PICC line insertion without thrombosis, 10.8 days (t=6.98, P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: In multivariate analysis, trauma, renal failure, left-sided catheters, basilic placement, TPN, and infusion with antibiotics, specifically vancomycin, were significant risk factors for UEVT associated with PICC insertion. Prophylaxis with low molecular weight heparin, unfractionated heparin or use of warfarin did not prevent the development of venous thrombosis in patients with PICCs. Length of hospital stay and cost are markedly increased in patients who develop PICC-associated upper extremity venous thrombosis.

Identification of risk factors for catheter-related thrombosis in patients with totally implantable venous access ports in the forearm.

PURPOSE: To identify risk factors for the development of catheter-related thrombosis (CRT) in patients with totally implantable venous access ports (TIVAP) in the forearm, and to analyze the effect of prophylaxis and treatment. METHODS: We retrospectively identified 200 patients (94 men, 106 women, mean age 57.7 +/-14 y) with TIVAP implantation in the forearm between 3/2010 and 11/2010. Type, number of punctures and sonographically defined diameter of the accessed vein were analyzed. Chemotherapy administered prior to the implantation procedure and history of thrombo-embolic events were assessed. Thrombo-embolic prophylaxis (TEP) following port implantation and treatment as well as course of CRT were analyzed. RESULTS: Twenty-one patients (10.5%) were diagnosed with CRT. Accessed vessels and mean diameter were basilic (n=150, 3.7 mm), brachial (n=39, 3.5 mm) and cephalic (n=11, 3.5 mm) vein. Neither type nor vessel diameter had effect on CRT development (P>.05). Implantation in the left forearm resulted in a significantly higher rate of CRT (P=.04). Ninety-five patients (47.5%) received chemotherapy and 30 patients (15.0%) had a history of thrombosis prior to implantation; both had no effect on development of CRT. Low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) was prescribed in 94/200 patients (47.0%) and had no effect on development of CRT (P>.05). Therapeutic anticoagulation with LMWH resulted in clinical improvement in 12/21 patients (57.4%). CONCLUSIONS: TIVAPs of the forearm may be associated with a certain rate of early and late CRT. The simplest vein to puncture should be selected for vascular access. Thrombo-embolic prophylaxis appears to be rather ineffective for prevention of CRT.

Endovascular electrocardiography to guide placement of totally implantable central venous catheters in oncologic patients.

PURPOSE: Appropriate tip position of totally implantable central venous catheters is essential in order to prevent catheter-related complications, in particular thrombosis. Endovascular electrocardiography is an economic and safe method to guide placement of catheters into the central veins. Although widely utilized, there is still lack of conclusive evidence about its efficacy. The aim of the study was to assess the efficacy and safety of endovascular electrocardiographic guided placement compared to the anthropometric method. METHODS: Endovascular ECG was employed to guide electrocardiographic placement of a central venous catheter in a cohort of oncologic patients. The rate of correct placement and the incidence of catheter-related thrombosis were considered. Patients in which central venous catheters were inserted with the anthropometric technique were considered as control group. RESULTS: The rate of correct placement was 91% and 50% for ECG-guided and anthropometric catheters (p<0.0001) respectively. None of the patients suffered from early insertion-related complications. The rate of catheter-related vascular thrombosis was lower for ECG-guided catheters (3.6% vs. 9.6%, n.s.), in particular for left-inserted catheters (0% vs. 33.3%, p=0.02). CONCLUSION: Endovascular electrocardiography was more effective than the anthropometric technique in placement of implantable central venous catheters and was associated with a lower incidence of catheter-related thrombosis, in particular for those inserted from the left-side.