Totally implantable venous access devices: retrospective analysis of different insertion techniques and predictors of complications in 796 devices implanted in a single institution.

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.

A multidisciplinary approach to improve preoperative understanding and reduce anxiety: a randomised study.

BACKGROUND: Emotional factors may influence reception of information provided during informed consent leading to incomplete understanding and reduced satisfaction. OBJECTIVE: This study was designed to test the hypothesis that a multidisciplinary approach could improve understanding of the information provided by the anaesthesiologist and in turn, reduce anxiety. DESIGN: A randomised controlled clinical trial. SETTING: Veneto Oncology Institute, Italian comprehensive cancer centre. Recruitment from December 2008 to June 2010. PATIENTS: Two hundred and fifty-one women requiring anaesthesia for breast cancer surgery. INTERVENTIONS: Women undergoing surgery for primary breast cancer were randomly assigned to either the structured anaesthesiology interview group (SAI) or the integrated multidisciplinary psycho-oncological approach (IPA). In the IPA arm, patients underwent an interview with the psycho-oncologist. Subsequently, and prior to preoperative anaesthesia evaluation, the psycho-oncologist informed the anaesthesiologist of the type of communicative strategy to adopt for each individual. In the SAI arm, patients received only the anaesthesiology interview. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Anxiety as assessed by State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI) questionnaire. RESULTS: Two hundred and fifty-one patients were randomised and 234 analysed: 124 in the IPA arm and 110 in the SAI arm. For both groups, mean anxiety scores, according to the STAI questionnaire, were statistically lower after the anaesthesiology visit than at baseline, with a reduction of 6.5 points for the IPA arm [95% confidence interval (CI) 4.6 to 8.4, P < 0.0001] and 4.7 points for the SAI arm (95% CI 2.6 to 6.7, P < 0.0001). There were no significant differences between the two groups in the mean anxiety score before and after the interview. For highly anxious patients, the STAI score decreased significantly more in the IPA group (10.2 points, 95% CI 7.4 to 13.0) than in the SAI group (6.8 points, 95% CI 3.8 to 9.8), P = 0.024.The information provided during the anaesthesiology visit was correctly understood by more than 80% of patients and was similar in both groups. CONCLUSION: In breast cancer surgical patients with high levels of preoperative anxiety, a multidisciplinary approach with psycho-oncological intervention proved to be useful at the preoperative anaesthesiology interview.