Comparative study of access routes for Port-A-Cath® implantation.

Abstract Introduction There has been an increase in the implantation of subcutaneous reservoirs in recent years. The objective of this study is to compare puncture techniques against venous dissection. Methods Retrospective cohort study. It included patients who required a Port-a-Cath. Patients were divided into two groups: venous puncture (PV) and venous dissection (DV). Patients were over 18 years of age, requiring continued intravenous treatment, with no restriction of pathology. We excluded those who had been carrying a previous reservoir, and pediatric patients. The choice of the technique was based on the surgeon's preferences. We analyzed the clinical parameters of age, sex, ASA, BMI, reason for placement and laterality, and data related to the complications and withdrawal rate in each of the groups. The average follow-up was two years. Results 386 patients were included during 5 years: 228 DV group and 155 PV group. In three cases, the technique was not registered. There were no differences between the two groups in age, sex, ASA, BMI and reason for implantation (P > .05). DV presented a lower number of complications, and increased replacement and removal of catheter in PV was observed. Despite this, there were no statistically significant differences (P = .113). Conclusions Both DV and PV are safe and effective techniques. In our experience, DV presented better intraoperative and long-term results. More studies are recommended to discern the technique to be used more safely.