Introduction: Fragmented central venous access device (CVAD) catheters can be retrieved percutaneously but a pertinent approach for catheters in various locations has not been addressed.
Report: Comparing 14 fragmented CVAD catheters managed with direct snaring with 35 catheters treated by a modified protocol with repositioning of intrapulmonary or intracardiac catheters (21/35 cases) to the inferior vena cava before snaring, the latter group had a shorter fluoroscopic time (23.0 ± 10.6 vs. 11.0 ± 4.0 min, P = 0.005) and less chest symptoms (42.8% vs. 8.7%, P = 0.011).
Conclusion: Fragmented CVAD catheters managed with a modified protocol with repositioning before snaring are feasible with reductions in fluoroscopic time and chest symptoms.
Article info
Publication history
Published online: May 14, 2012
Footnotes
☆Full article available at www.ejvsextra.com
Identification
Copyright
© 2012 Published by Elsevier Inc.
User license
Elsevier user license | How you can reuse 
Elsevier's open access license policy
Elsevier user license
Permitted
For non-commercial purposes:
- Read, print & download
- Text & data mine
- Translate the article
Not Permitted
- Reuse portions or extracts from the article in other works
- Redistribute or republish the final article
- Sell or re-use for commercial purposes
Elsevier's open access license policy
ScienceDirect
Access this article on ScienceDirectLinked Article
- Endovascular Retrieval of Fragmented Central Venous Access Device Catheters: A Management Protocol Based on Catheter LocationEJVES ExtraVol. 24Issue 1Open Access
Related Articles
Comments
Commenting Guidelines
To submit a comment for a journal article, please use the space above and note the following:
- We will review submitted comments as soon as possible, striving for within two business days.
- This forum is intended for constructive dialogue. Comments that are commercial or promotional in nature, pertain to specific medical cases, are not relevant to the article for which they have been submitted, or are otherwise inappropriate will not be posted.
- We require that commenters identify themselves with names and affiliations.
- Comments must be in compliance with our Terms & Conditions.
- Comments are not peer-reviewed.
