Central Venous Obstruction in Hemodialysis Patients: The Usefulness of Percutaneous Treatment

PURPOSE: To analyse the effectiveness of percutaneous treatment of central venous obstruction in patients undergoing hemodialysis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In 100 patients, 107 central venous strictures [56 subclavian (occlusion:21, stenosis:35) and 51 innominate (occlusion:23, stenosis:28)] were assessed, and 170 percutaneous angioplasty procedures were performed. Balloon dilation of the venous lumen was the preferred mode, but if dilation was incomplete we inserted a stent at the site of the stricture. Technical success, procedural complications and the long-term patency rate were evaluated, and the patency difference according to location and degree of stricture, the existence of DM, and any history of central catheter insertion were also determined. RESULTS: We inserted 52 stents in 170 procedures, in 157 (92.4%) of which initial technical success was achieved. Stent migration occurred in two cases and balloon rupture in three. The 6- and 12-month primary patency rates were 46.2% and 24.1%, respectively, and the mean patency rate was 8.5 months. The 1-, 2- and 3-year accumulative patency rates were 59.8%, 47.5% and 35.7%, respectively, and the mean patency rate was 23.5 months. Other than in the history of central catheter insertion, there were no statistically significant differences in patency rates (p=0.0128). CONCLUSION: In hemodialysis patients with a central venous stricture, percutaneous angioplasty is a safe and useful procedure, but to maintain long-term central venous patency, repeated interventions are required.

Hemodialysis Shunts-related Subclavian Vein Stenosis: Treatment with Self-expandable Metallic Stent

PURPOSE: To evaluate the usefulness of placement of self-expandable stents in hemodialytic shunt-relatedsubclavian vein stenosis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Self-expandable metallic stent was placed in nine patients withhemodialytic shunt-related subclavian vein stenosis. In seven cases, angioplasty was attempted before stentplacement; in five, stents were placed immediately after failed angioplasty; and in two, due to restenosis afterangioplasty. Procedures involved a 10mm diameter, 7-10cm length Wallstent in eight cases, and a 10mm diameter, 8cm length Hanaro stent in one. In all cases, clinical follow-up, which included physical examination and themeasurement of venous resistance pressure during hemodialysis, was performed. The follow-up period was between 5months and 1 year 7 months. Repeated intervention was performed if restenosis was detected. RESULTS: The stenoticsites were in eight cases the site of a previous subclavian venous line, and in one, the site of anatomicnarrowing at the thoracic inlet of the subclavian vein. The technical success rate was 100%; a resultingcomplication was stent migration into the right atrium in one case in which a Hanaro stent had been used; this wasremoved by snaring. During follow-up of the eight patients in whon stent placement was successful, restenosisdeveloped in three cases. This occurred during the 7th, 8th, and 15th month, respectively. Two such cases weretreated by balloon dilatation. CONCLUSION: In hemodialytic shunt-related subclavian vein stenosis, treatmentinvolving the use of a self-expandable metallic stent is useful, especially for treating a lesion which has notresponded to angioplasty with a high patency rate.

Placement of an Implantable Central Venous Access Device

PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of placement of a central venous catheter with infusion portinto the superior vena cava MATERIALS & METHODS: Central venous catheters with a infusion port were implanted in21 patients (M:F=4:17, age range:15-63, mean age:41) diagnosed as suffering from breast cancer(n=9),lymphoma(n=7), thymoma(n=2) rhabdomyosarcoma(n=2) and rectal cancer(n=1). The peripheral portion of the subclaveanvein was punctured under fluoroscopic guidance during injection of contrast media at the site of the ipsilateralperipheral vein (20 cases) and under ultrasonographic guidance (1 case). 9.6F central venous catheters placed inthe superior vena cava via the subclavian vein and the connected infusion ports were implanted in the subcutaneouspocket near the puncture site of the right anterosuperior chest wall. RESULTS: Catheter insertion in the superiorvena cava and port implantation in the subcutaneous pocket were successful in all patients. Mean procedure timewas 23 minutes and there were no early complications. Because the incision site had not healed, one patientunderwent resuturing 3 weeks after the procedure. In one case, thrombotic occlusion of the catheter occurred, butsuccessful recanalization, involving urokinase infusion, was performed. At the end of the chemotherapy schedule,at 180, 157 and 139 days after the procedure, three central venous catheters with a infusion port were removed inthe radiologic suite. Catheter days are 5 days-180 days(mean, 119) from now (1997. 7. 1). CONCLUSIONS: Radiologicplacement under fluoroscopic guidance of a central venous catheter with a infusion port is easy, safe and usefulfor patients requring long-term venous access.

Placement of Central Venous Access via Subclavian Vein under Fluoroscopic Guidance with Intravenous Contrast Injection

PURPOSE: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of Hickman catheter placement via the subclavian vein under fluoroscopic guidance with intravenous contrast injection. MATERIALS AND METHODS: During an eleven-month period, 187 Hickman catheters were percutaneously placed in 167 consecutive patients in an interventional radiology suite. Subclavian venous puncture was made with injection of contrast medium into the peripheral venous line. After subclavian venous access had been obtained, a subcutaneous tunnel was created using a peel-away sheath or a tunneler. The Hickman catheters were inserted through a peel-away sheath, the distal tip of which was at the junction of the right atrium and the superior vena cava. RESULTS: One hundred and eighty-six Hickman catheters were successfully placed; the one failure was due to an atomical tortuosity of the vein(0.53%). Complications included one case of subclavian vein occlusion (0.53%); three of line occlusion by thrombus (1.6%); one of oozing at the suture site (0.53%); six of infection or inflammation (3.2%); eight of natural removal (4.2%); one case of air embolism (0.53%) and two of malposition (0.1%). Major complications such as pneumothorax or arterial puncture leading to mediastinal hemorrhage did not, however, occur. CONCLUSION: The authors concluded that radiologic Hickman catheter placement offers advantages over traditional approaches in terms of safety, convenience, and time and cost savings.

Radiologic Placement of Tunneled Central Venous Catheter

PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of fluoroscopy-guided, radiologic placement of a tunneled central venous catheter into the superior vena cava (SVC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty five patients underwent tunneled central venous catheter placement to facilitate long-term chemotherapy. They included 33 leukemicpatients, one colon cancer patient, and one multiple myeloma patient. After confirming central venous patency witha injection of contrast media via the peripheral cephalic or basilic vein in the wrist joint, the subclavian veinwas punctured under fluoroscopic guidance. A 7F double lumen TPN catheter was placed into the SVC through asubcutaneous tunnel in the anterior chest wall. RESULTS: Catheter placements were successful in all patients. The mean procedure time was 17.2 minutes, mean fluoroscopy time was 1.3 minutes, mean number of punctures was 1.4, and mean volume of injected contrast media was 43.5 cc. Only two of all leukemic patients developed mild hematomas atthe puncture site, but these soon resolved themselves. None of the patients developed pneumothorax or hemothorax.but late complications included local infection in two patients (6%) and thrombotic occlusion of the catheter inone (3%). The occluded catheter was successfully recanalized with Urokinase infusion. CONCLUSION: Fluoroscopy-guided, radiologic placement of a tunneled central venous catheter is an easy and safe method, anduseful for patients requiring long-term venous access.