(1) Background: Implantable port catheters are vital for cancer treatment, but complications such as infections and mechanical failures pose challenges. Lymphoma and leukemia patients' unique cellular abnormalities may influence these risks. This study aimed to determine whether the underlying disease or varying degrees of cytopenia increase the risk of unplanned early port removal. (2) Methods: We conducted a single institution retrospective study that included 368 patients with lymphoma or leukemia who received implantable venous access ports between January 2015 and December 2022. Propensity score matching was employed to compare patients with and without early removals. (3) Results: Univariate analysis revealed statistically significant differences between early and non-early port removal for cancer, hemoglobin, and PG-SGA scores. Cox proportional hazard analysis demonstrated that leukemia patients exhibited a 4.5 times higher risk for unplanned early catheter removal than lymphoma patients did (HR 4.589, 95% CI 1.377-15.299, p = 0.013), while patients with normal nutrition, based on the PS-SGA, demonstrated a 75% lower risk of unplanned early catheter removal than those with any degree of malnutrition did (HR 0.258, 95% CI 0.116-0575, p < 0.001). Unplanned early catheter removal negatively impacted patient survival. (4) Conclusions: The type of cancer, rather than individual cytopenias, is an independent factor influencing clinical outcomes in lymphoma and leukemia patients.

Totally implantable venous access devices (TIVADs) or ports are increasingly used in oncology settings to provide long-term, easy venous access. This study reports our experience and results with 1180 cases in Singapore.

Data from January 2019 to January 2022, obtained from a hospital-approved secure database application called the Research Electronic Data Capture registry, were reviewed and analysed retrospectively.

A total of 1180 patients underwent TIVAD implantation with a 100% technical success rate. The mean age of the cohort was 61.9 years. The mean dwell duration was 342 days (standard deviation [SD] 223; range 3-1911). By 1 February 2022, 83% of patients were still using the TIVAD, 13.6 % underwent removal after completion of treatment, 2.1% were removed due to infection, 0.6% due to malfunction, 0.6% due to port extrusion and 0.1% at patient's request. The right internal jugular vein (IJV) was the most commonly accessed site (83.6%), followed by the left IJV (15.6%). The early post-procedure complications were pain (24.7%), bruising (9.2%), swelling (3.6%), bleeding (0.5%), fever (0.4%), itchiness (0.2%) and allergic dermatitis (0.1%). The delayed post-procedure complications were TIVAD site cellulitis (3.80%); discharge (1.10%); skin erosion with device extrusion (0.60%); malpositioned catheter (0.33%), which was successfully repositioned, catheter-related bloodstream infections (0.25%); migration of TIVAD leading to catheter dislodgement (0.25%); venous thrombosis (0.25%); fibrin sheath formation requiring stripping (0.10%) and TIVAD chamber inversion (0.10%).

TIVAD implantation via the jugular vein under radiological guidance provides a safe, reliable and convenient means of long-term venous access in oncology patients. By sharing our experience and acceptable outcomes from a large oncology cohort, we aim to increase the awareness and adoption of TIVAD usage in oncology patients, especially in Asia.

Lack of agreed terminology and definitions in healthcare compromises communication, patient safety, optimal management of adverse events, and research progress. The purpose of this scoping review was to understand the terminologies used to describe central venous access devices (CVADs), associated complications and reasons for premature removal in people undergoing cancer treatment. It also sought to identify the definitional sources for complications and premature removal reasons. The objective was to map language and descriptions used and to explore opportunities for standardisation.

A systematic search of MedLine, PubMed, Cochrane, CINAHL Complete and Embase databases was performed. Eligibility criteria included, but were not limited to, adult patients with cancer, and studies published between 2017 and 2022. Articles were screened and data extracted in Covidence. Data charting included study characteristics and detailed information on CVADs including terminologies and definitional sources for complications and premature removal reasons. Descriptive statistics, tables and bar graphs were used to summarise charted data.

From a total of 2363 potentially eligible studies, 292 were included in the review. Most were observational studies (n = 174/60%). A total of 213 unique descriptors were used to refer to CVADs, with all reasons for premature CVAD removal defined in 84 (44%) of the 193 studies only, and complications defined in 56 (57%) of the 292 studies. Where available, definitions were author-derived and/or from national resources and/or other published studies.

Substantial variation in CVAD terminology and a lack of standard definitions for associated complications and premature removal reasons was identified. This scoping review demonstrates the need to standardise CVAD nomenclature to enhance communication between healthcare professionals as patients undergoing cancer treatment transition between acute and long-term care, to enhance patient safety and rigor of research protocols, and improve the capacity for data sharing.

To compare the port infection rate between single-lumen (SL) and double-lumen (DL) ports and to determine whether the use of a DL port is an independent risk factor for port infection among patients with cancer.

This retrospective study included 2,573 adult oncologic patients (aged >18 years) who had either a SL (n = 841) or a DL (n = 1,732) chest port implanted between 2013 and 2020 at a single institution. Patients who had port infection, including port-site infection and port-related bloodstream infection, were identified through chart review. After propensity score matching based on 13 potentially confounding variables, a total of 493 pairs of patients with either SL (SL group) or DL (DL group) ports were subjected to analysis. The port infection rate was compared between the 2 groups using Poisson regression. Multivariate proportional subdistribution hazards regression (PSHREG) analysis was conducted to determine whether use of a DL port is an independent risk factor for port infection.

The cumulative follow-up period for the matched cohort was 371,853 catheter-days (median, 297 catheter-days per port; range, 0-1,903 catheter-days). The port infection rate of the DL group was significantly higher than that of the SL group (0.232 vs 0.113 infections per 1,000 catheter-days; P = .001). PSHREG analysis demonstrated that use of a DL port was an independent risk factor of port infection (subdistribution hazard ratio, 2.30; 95% CI, 1.33-3.78; P = .002).

DL ports were associated with a higher risk of port infection compared with SL ports in adult oncologic patients.

Infection is the most frequent complication associated with the use of totally implantable venous access port (TIVAP). This retrospective study was conducted to determine the risk factors affecting TIVAP-related infection.

A total of 1406 patients implanted with TIVAP at our center were included in this retrospective study. Incidence of perioperative infection, patient characteristics and bacteriologic data were retrieved and analyzed. Univariable analyses and multiple logistic regression analyses were used to determine the risk factors.

Overall, 72 (5.1%) patients had perioperative infection, and TIVAP was finally removed from 12 (0.85%) patients. There was significantly more hematologic malignancy in the infection group, compared to the non-infection group. Patients with chemotherapy and infection within 30 days before operation also had more infections. There were more inpatients in the infection group than in the non-infection group. The rate of hematoma was higher in the infected patients. Multivariate logistic analysis revealed that hematoma (OR 5.695, p < 0.001), preoperative hospital stay (⩾14d) (OR 2.945, p < 0.001), history of chemotherapy (OR 2.628, p = 0.002), history of infection (within 30 days) (OR 4.325, p < 0.001) were independent risk factor for infection.

This study demonstrated that hematoma, preoperative hospital stay (⩾14d), history of chemotherapy and history of infection (within 30 days) are independent risk factor for all patients.

Biofilm is the conglomeration of microbial cells which is associated with a surface. In the recent times, the study of biofilm has gained popularity and vivid research is being done to know about the effects of biofilm and that it consists of many organisms which are symbiotic in nature, some of which are human pathogens. Here, in this study, we have discussed about biofilms, its formation, relevance of its presence in the biosphere, and the possible remediations to cope up with its negative effects. Since removal of biofilm is difficult, emphasis has been made to suggest ways to prevent biofilm formation and also to devise ways to utilize biofilm in an economically and environment-friendly method.

The purpose of this study was to retrospectively investigate risk factors for chest port (port) infections within 30 days of placement (early port infections) in adult oncologic patients.

This single-institution, three-center retrospective study identified 1,714 patients (868 males, 846 females; median age 60.0 years old) who underwent port placement between January 2013 and August 2017. All patients received an intravenous antibiotic prior to port placement. The median absolute neutrophil count was 5,260 cells/μL, the median white blood cell (WBC) count was 7,700 cells/μL, and the median serum albumin was 4.00 g/dL at the time of port placement. Double-lumen ports were most commonly implanted (74.85%) more frequently in an outpatient setting (72.69%). Risk factors for early port infections were elucidated using univariate and multivariate proportional subdistribution hazard regression analyses.

A total of 20 patients (1.2%) had early port infections; 15 patients (0.9%) had positive blood cultures. The mean time to infection was 20 days (range, 9-30 days). The port-related 30-day mortality rate was 0.2% (4 of 1,714 patients). Most bloodstream infections were attributed to Staphylococcus spp. (n = 11). In multivariate analysis, hematologic malignancy (hazard ratio [HR], 2.61; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.15-5.92.; P = .02), hypoalbuminemia (albumin <3.5 g/dL; HR, 3.52; 95% CI: 1.48-8.36; P = .004), leukopenia (WBC <3,500 cells/μL; HR, 3.00; 95% CI: 1.11-8.09; P = .03), and diabetes mellitus (HR, 3.71; 95% CI: 1.57-8.83) remained statistically significant risk factors for early port infection.

Hematologic malignancy, hypoalbuminemia, leukopenia, and diabetes mellitus at the time of port placement were independent risk factors for early port infections.

Totally implantable access port is a fully implantable drug delivery system that is implanted subcutaneously and can be retained for a long time. Advantages of ports include a simple nursing process, low risk of infection and embolism, and high patient comfort. In order to promote the standardized application of ports in the treatment of digestive tract tumors and reduce port-related complications, the Chinese Research Hospital Association Digestive Tumor Committee, the Chinese Association of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgeons, the Chinese Gastric Cancer Association, and the Gastrointestinal Surgical Group of Chinese Surgical Society Affiliated to Chinese Medical Association have organized multidisciplinary expert discussions at the General Hospital of the People's Liberation Army and nation-wide expert letter reviews and on-site seminars, and formulated an expert consensus of the operation guidelines.

To compare early totally implantable central venous port catheter-related infection rates after inpatient vs outpatient placement and to determine whether the risk associated with inpatient placement is influenced by length of hospital stay.

In this single-institution retrospective study, 5,301 patients (3,618 women; mean age 57 y) underwent port placement by interventional radiologists between October 2004 and January 2018. The 30-day infection rate was compared between inpatients and outpatients using survival analysis. Among inpatients, the effect of time from admission to port placement and from placement to discharge was analyzed using a survival regression tree.

The 30-day infection rate was 3.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.9%-6.1%) among 386 inpatients and 1.0% (95% CI = 0.7%-1.3%) among 4,915 outpatients (hazard ratio [HR] = 3.6, 95% CI = 2.0-6.6, P < .001). Inpatient placement was a significant risk factor after accounting for covariates in multivariate analysis (HR = 2.2, 95% CI = 1.0-4.7, P = .05) and controlling for demographic differences by propensity score matching (HR = 2.8, 95% CI = 1.0-7.8, P = .04). Infection rate was 11% (95% CI = 4.7%-22%) among 65 inpatients in whom time from admission to placement was ≥ 7 days, 5.1% (95% CI = 1.9%-11%) among 129 inpatients in whom admission to placement was < 7 days and time to discharge was > 3 days, and 0% (95% CI = 0%-2.1%) among 192 inpatients in whom admission to placement was < 7 days and time to discharge was ≤ 3 days (P < .001).

Inpatient port placement was associated with a higher risk of early infection. However, a clinical decision tree based on shorter length of stay before and after placement may identify a subset of hospitalized patients not at increased risk for infection.