RESUMO
PURPOSE: Systemic chemotherapy, depending on the regimen, can be administered through peripheral intravenous (pIV) access or through central venous access devices (CVADs). There is no current best practice regarding optimal access for chemotherapy for patients with testicular cancer (TC). We retrospectively evaluated patients undergoing systemic chemotherapy for TC and compared baseline characteristics and complications of patients using pIV versus CVADs. METHODS: We included patients with TC who underwent first-line systemic chemotherapy at the University of Colorado Hospitals from 2005 to 2020. Data were collected on demographics, cancer characteristics, type, duration of chemotherapy, pIV or CVAD use, and associated complication rates. We then performed univariate and multivariate regression analyses to compare complication rates and risk factors for each group. RESULTS: One hundred fifty-four patients met inclusion criteria. Ninety-two (60%) patients used CVADs, and 62 patients (40%) used pIV for their initial treatment. Only six (9.7%) of 62 patients transitioned from pIV to CVADs during therapy. Similarly, 10 of 92 (10.9%) patients with initial CVAD needed to transition to a different type of CVAD or to pIV (P = .81). There were a greater number of venous access-related complications (48 of 92 patients, 52.2%) and overall thrombotic events (33 of 92 patients, 35.9%) for the CVAD group (P > .001) when compared with the pIV group. We observed an association between the following factors and venous access-related complications during chemotherapy: higher stage TC, increased total chemotherapy cycles, and delayed therapy. CONCLUSION: Peripheral IV use for first-line nonvesicant chemotherapy in patients with TC appears to be well tolerated with high rates of therapy completion and lower rates of complications when compared with CVADs. These data support our preferred treatment approach and provide evidence that pIV access is a safe and effective way to deliver chemotherapy for patients with TC.
