Korean J Adult Nurs.  2018 Apr;30(2):216-225. 10.7475/kjan.2018.30.2.216.

A Prospective Study of Extending the Implanted Port Heparin Flushing Cycle in Outpatients with Solid Tumors

• Kim H
• Ku H
• Choi SE

• KMID: 2411824
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.7475/kjan.2018.30.2.216

Abstract

PURPOSE
This prospective study was done to determine if it is possible to extend the implanted port heparin flushing cycle.
METHODS
Patients enrolled in the study had their port flushed once 8 weeks or more in a tertiary hospital between July 2015 and November 2016. They were observed until they had completed six scheduled flushes or developed any port-related complication. Functional outcomes at heparin flushing were evaluated by using port infection, normal saline injection, blood aspiration and patient's posture during heparin administration.
RESULTS
A total of 24 patients were enrolled and total of 72 cases of heparin flush were observed. The median heparin flushing interval was 95 days. No infection of port or problem with saline injection occurred. But there were 6 cases of initial difficult and 1 case of difficult in blood aspiration. However, there was not any case to get rid of the heparin flush, nor were there any patients noted who were not able to use it.
CONCLUSION
It was confirmed that there was no problem in the status and function of the implanted port, even if the heparin flush cycle was extended to 8 weeks or more.

MeSH Terms

Flushing*
Heparin*
Humans
Outpatients*
Posture
Prospective Studies*
Tertiary Care Centers
Vascular Access Devices
Heparin

Reference

1. Paleczny J, Banyś-Jafernik B, Gazurek K, Kierpieć K, Szczerba H, Zipser P. Longterm totally implantable venous access port systems-one center experience. Anaesthesiology Intensive Therapy. 2013; 45(4):215–22. https://doi.org/10.5603/AIT.2013.0042.

2. Dal Molin A, Rasero L, Guerretta L, Perfetti E, Clerico M. The late complications of totally implantable central venous access ports: the results from an Italian multicenter prospective observation study. European Journal of Oncology Nursing. 2011; 15(5):377–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejon.2010.11.007.

3. Bishop L, Dougherty L, Bodenham A, Mansi J, Crowe P, Kib-bler C, et al. Guidelines on the insertion and management of central venous access devices in adults. International Journal of Laboratory Hematology. 2007; 29(4):261–78. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-553x.2007.00931.x.

4. Conley SB, Buckley P, Magarace L, Hsieh C, Pedulla LV. Stan-dardizing best nursing practice for implanted ports: applying evidence-based professional guidelines to prevent central line- associated bloodstream infections. Journal of Infusion Nursing. 2017; 40(3):165–74. https://doi.org/10.1097/nan.0000000000000217.

5. Schiffer CA, Mangu PB, Wade JC, Camp-Sorrell D, Cope DG, El-Rayes BF, et al. Central venous catheter care for the patient with cancer: American society of clinical oncology clinical practice guideline. Journal of Clinical Oncology. 2013; 31(10):1357–70. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2012.45.5733.

6. Baskin JL, Pui CH, Reiss U, Wilimas JA, Metzger ML, Ribeiro RC, et al. Management of occlusion and thrombosis associated with longterm indwelling central venous catheters. The Lancet. 2009; 374(9684):159–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(09)60220-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(09)60220-8.

7. Sousa B, Furlanetto J, Hutka M, Gouveia P, Wuerstlein R, Mariz JM, et al. Central venous access in oncology: ESMO clinical practice guidelines. Annals of Oncology. 2015; 26(Suppl 5):v152–68. https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdv296.

8. Greater Glasgow and Clyde. Care and maintenance of central venous catheter devices [Internet]. Scotland: National Health Service;2011. [cited 2017 July 5]. Available from:. http://www.beatson.scot.nhs.uk/content/mediaassets/doc/cvad%20guidelines%20september%2008%20final.pdf. http://www.beatson.scot.nhs.uk/content/mediaassets/doc/cvad%20guidelines%20september%2008%20final.pdf.

9. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Basic infection control and prevention plan for outpatient oncology settings 2011 [Internet]. Atlanta: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention;2011. [cited 2017 July 5]. Available from:. https://www.cdc.gov/hai/pdfs/guidelines/basic-infection-control-prevention-plan-2011.pdf. https://www.cdc.gov/hai/pdfs/guidelines/basic-infection-control-prevention-plan-2011.pdf.

10. Camp-Sorrell D. Access device guidelines: recommendations for nursing practice and education. 3rd ed.Pittsburgh, PA: Oncology Nursing Society;2011. p. 40.

11. Korean Oncology Nursing Society. Oncology nursing practice guideline. Asian Oncology Nursing. 2009; 9(1):76–115.

12. Kefeli U, Dane F, Yumuk PF, Karamanoglu A, Iyikesici S, Ba-saran G, et al. Prolonged interval in prophylactic heparin flushing for maintenance of subcutaneous implanted port care in patients with cancer. European Journal of Cancer Care. 2009; 18(2):191–4. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2354.2008.00973.x.

13. Kuo YS, Schwartz B, Santiago J, Anderson PS, Fields AL, Goldberg GL. How often should a port-a-cath be flushed? Cancer Investigation. 2005; 23(7):582–5. https://doi.org/10.1080/07357900500276923.

14. Girda E, Phaeton R, Goldberg GL, Kuo D. Extending the interval for port-a-cath maintenance. Modern Chemotherapy. 2013; 2(2):15–8. https://doi.org/10.4236/mc.2013.22003.

15. Odabas H, Ozdemir NY, Ziraman I, Aksoy S, Abali H, Oksuzo-glu B, et al. Effect of port-care frequency on venous port catheter-related complications in cancer patients. International Journal of Clinical Oncology. 2014; 19(4):761–6. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10147-013-0609-7.

16. Ignatov A, Ignatov T, Taran A, Smith B, Costa SD, Bischoff J. Interval between port catheter flushing can be extended to four months. Gynecologic and Obstetric Investigation. 2010; 70(2):91–4. https://doi.org/10.1159/000294919.

17. Kim HK, Choi SE, Lee JH, We ES, Joh HJ, Kim KS. Current status of interval of heparin flushing for maintenance of an implanted port in solid tumor patients. Journal of Korean Biological Nursing Science. 2014; 16(3):251–7. https://doi.org/10.7586/jkbns.2014.16.3.251.

18. Palese A, Baldassar D, Rupil A, Bonanni G, Capellari Maria T, Contessi D, et al. Maintaining patency in totally implantable venous access devices (TIVAD): a time-to-event analysis of different lock irrigation intervals. European Journal of Oncology Nursing. 2014; 18(1):66–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejon.2013.09.002.

19. Bae JI. Insertion and management of central venous catheter. Hanyang Medical Reviews. 2011; 31(1):23–31. https://doi.org/10.7599/hmr.2011.31.1.23.

20. Edge SB, Byrd DR, Compton CC, Fritz AG, Greene FL, Trotti A. AJCC cancer staging manual. 7th ed.New York: Springer;2010.

21. Park KH. Diagnosis and management of central venous cathe-ter-related infections. The Korean Journal of Medicine. 2014; 86(3):282–94. https://doi.org/10.3904/kjm.2014.86.3.282.

22. Goossens GA, Stas M, Jérôme M, Moons P. Systematic review: malfunction of totally implantable venous access devices in cancer patients. Supportive Care in Cancer. 2011; 19(7):883–98. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-011-1171-3.

23. Tabatabaie O, Kasumova GG, Eskander MF, Critchlow JF, Tawa NE, Tseng JF. Totally implantable venous access devices: a review of complications and management strategies. American Journal of Clinical Oncology. 2017; 40(1):94–105. https://doi.org/10.1097/coc.0000000000000361.

24. Lebeaux D, Fernández-Hidalgo N, Chauhan A, Lee S, Ghi-go JM, Almirante B, et al. Management of infections related to totally implantable venous-access ports: challenges and perspectives. The Lancet Infectious Disease. 2014; 14(2):146–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1473-3099(13)70266-4.

25. Milani A, Mazzocco K, Gandini S, Pravettoni G, Libutti L, Zencovich C, et al. Incidence and determinants of port occlusions in cancer outpatients: a prospective cohort study. Cancer Nursing. 2017; 40(2):102–7. https://doi.org/10.1097/NCC.0000000000000357.

26. Rosenbluth G, Tsang L, Vittinghoff E, Wilson S, Wilson-Ganz J, Auerbach A. Impact of decreased heparin dose for flush-lock of implanted venous access ports in pediatric oncology patients. Pediatric Blood & Cancer. 2014; 61(5):855–8. https://doi.org/10.1002/pbc.24949.

27. Goossens GA, Jérôme M, Janssens C, Peetermans WE, Fieuws S, Moons P, et al. Comparing normal saline versus diluted heparin to lock non-valved totally implantable venous access devices in cancer patients: a randomised, non-inferiority, open trial. Annals of Oncology. 2013; 24(7):1892–9. https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdt114.

28. Dal Molin A, Allara E, Montani D, Milani S, Frassati C, Cossu S, et al. Flushing the central venous catheter: is heparin neces-sary? The Journal of Vascular Access. 2014; 15(4):241–8. https://doi.org/10.5301/jva.5000225.

29. Solinas G, Platini F, Trivellato M, Rigo C, Alabiso O, Galetto AS. Port in oncology practice: 3-monthly locking with normal saline for catheter maintenance, a preliminary report. The Journal of Vascular Access. 2017; 18(4):325–7. https://doi.org/10.5301/jva.5000740.

30. Vescia S, Baumgärtner AK, Jacobs VR, Kiechle-Bahat M, Rody A, Loibl S, et al. Management of venous port systems in oncology: a review of current evidence. Annals of Oncology. 2008; 19(1):9–15. https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdm272.