Chest wall-parallel vs. Conventional subclavian venous catheterization in cancer chemotherapy: A comparison of complication rates

Abstract

The incidence of complications such as pneumothorax and hematoma between the chest wall-parallel and conventional subclavian venous catheterization in cancer chemotherapy was compared. From December 2011 to March 2016, a total of 314 patients undergoing chemotherapy for cancer in the Guizhou Provincial People's Hospital were assigned to either the Chest Wall-parallel (n=155) or the conventional subclavian venous catheterization group (n=159) in order to observe the primary success rate for catheterization and to assess the incidence of complications such as pneumothorax, hemothorax, hematoma, and internal jugular venous injury. The primary success rates for catheterization were not significantly different between the conventional and chest wall-parallel subclavian venous catheterization groups (94.3% vs. 96.8%, P>0.05), with a total catheterization success rate of 100% in both groups. However, the incidence of pneumothorax was significantly different between the groups (6.29% in conventional vs. 0% in chest wall-parallel subclavian venous catheterization group, P<0.05). Therefore, compared to conventional subclavian venous catheterization, the chest wall-parallel approach could reduce the risk of or even totally prevent pneumothorax and other venipunctures and is, thus, a relatively safe and effective technique that could have wide applications in clinical settings.