Central venous infusion port inserted via high versus low jugular venous approaches: Retrospective comparison of outcome and complications

PurposeTo retrospectively compare immediate and long-term outcome of central venous infusion port inserted via right high versus low jugular vein approaches.Materials and methodsThe study included 163 patients (125 women patients, 38 men patients; age range, 18–79 years; mean age, 53 years); 142 patients underwent port insertion with low jugular vein approach and 21 patients with high jugular vein approach. The causes of high jugular vein puncture were metastatic lymphadenopathy (n = 7), operation scar (n = 6), radiation scar (n = 5), failure of low jugular vein puncture (n = 2), and abnormal course of right subclavian artery (n = 1). Medical records and radiologic studies were reviewed retrospectively to determine and compare the outcome and the occurrence of complication related to port.ResultsThe procedure-related complications were all minor (n = 14, 8.6%) in both groups; hematoma (n = 4, 2.8% in low jugular puncture group and n = 1, 4.8% in high jugular puncture group, p = 0.6295), air embolism (n = 2, 1.4% in low jugular puncture group and n = 0 in high jugular puncture group, p = 0.5842) and minor bleeding (n = 5, 3.5% in low jugular vein puncture group and n = 2, 9.5% in high jugular vein puncture group, p = 0.2054). The average length of follow-up was 431 days for low jugular vein puncture group and 284 days for high jugular vein puncture group. The difference between two groups was significant (p = 0.0349).The reasons for catheter removal were patients’ death (59 in low jugular puncture group and 14 in high jugular puncture group, p = 0.0465), suspected infection (11 in low jugular vein puncture group and 2 in high jugular vein puncture group, p = 0.8242), catheter occlusion (four in low jugular vein puncture group and one in high jugular vein puncture group, p = 0.6583). The catheter tip migrated upward an average of 1.86 cm (range, −0.5 to 5.0 cm) in low jugular vein puncture group and 1.56 cm (range, 0–3.6 cm) in high jugular vein puncture group and there was no significant difference (p = 0.4232).ConclusionsRight high jugular vein approach can be a feasible alternative to right low jugular vein approach.