Hypnosis as adjunct therapy to conscious sedation for venous access device implantation in breast cancer: A pilot study

Abstract

Background:

Recent reviews support that hypnosis has great potential for reducing pain and anxiety during mini-invasive surgery. Here, we assessed the feasibility of hypnotic induction session as adjunct therapy in conscious sedation for venous access device implantation. Primary outcomes were safety and patient satisfaction.

Methods:

Thirty consecutive women with breast cancer were proposed adjunct of hypnosis before implantation under conscious sedation (midazolam: 0.5 mg ± bolus of Ketamin: 5 mg on demand) indicated for chemotherapy. Self-hypnosis was programmed and guided by one of two trained anesthesiologists. Implantation was performed by one of two experimented surgeons. It consisted of blind subclavian implantation of Braun ST 305 devices using a percutaneous technique adapted from Selinger’s procedure. Clinical data were prospectively collected and retrospectively analyzed. A comprehensive custom-made questionnaire recorded patient satisfaction.

Results:

In all, 30/30 patients consented to the procedure. The median age was 54 years (range: 35–77 years). The primary procedure was successful in 29/30. One case was converted into internal jugular vein access after a first attempt. Median length time of the implantation procedure in the operative room was 20 min (range: 10–60 min). Median length time in the recovery room preceding home discharge was 65 min (range: 15–185 min). None of the patients suffered complications. The satisfaction rate was ≥90%, 27/30 patients would get hypnosis in case of reimplantation if necessary and 27/30 would recommend this procedure to others.

Conclusion:

Hypnosis under conscious sedation appears feasible and safe for port implantation under conscious sedation in cancer patients. Further studies would determine the exact value of hypnosis effectiveness.

Keywords

Venous access device implantation hypnosis breast cancer

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Steliarova-Foucher

O’Callaghan

Ferlay

et al . The European cancer observatory: a new data resource. Eur J Cancer 2015; 51(9): 1131–1143.

Cardoso

Loibl

Pagani

et al . The European society of breast cancer specialists recommendations for the management of young women with breast cancer. Eur J Cancer 2012; 48(18): 3355–3377.

Di Carlo

Pulvirenti

Mannino

et al . Increased use of percutaneous technique for totally implantable venous access devices. is it real progress? A 27-year comprehensive review on early complications. Ann Surg Oncol 2010; 17(6): 1649–1656.

Yip

Funaki

Subcutaneous chest ports via the internal jugular vein. A retrospective study of 117 oncology patients. Acta Radiol 2002; 43(4): 371–375.

Maurer

Beck

Hamm

et al . Central venous port catheters: evaluation of patients’ satisfaction with implantation under local anesthesia. J Vasc Access 2009; 10(1): 27–32.

Granic

Zdravkovic

Krstajic

et al . Totally implantable central venous catheters of the port-a-cath type: complications due to its use in the treatment of cancer patients. J BUON 2014; 19(3): 842–846.

Montgomery

Weltz

Seltz

et al . Brief presurgery hypnosis reduces distress and pain in excisional breast biopsy patients. Int J Clin Exp Hypn 2002; 50(1): 17–32.

Lang

Berbaum

Faintuch

et al . Adjunctive self-hypnotic relaxation for outpatient medical procedures: a prospective randomized trial with women undergoing large core breast biopsy. Pain 2006; 126(1–3): 155–164.

Schnur

Montgomery

Hallquist

et al . Anticipatory psychological distress in women scheduled for diagnostic and curative breast cancer surgery. Int J Behav Med 2008; 15(1): 21–28.

10.

Troianos

Hartman

Glas

et al . Special articles: guidelines for performing ultrasound guided vascular cannulation: recommendations of the American Society of Echocardiography and the Society of Cardiovascular Anesthesiologists. Anesth Analg 2012; 114(1): 46–72.

11.

Brass

Hellmich

Kolodziej

et al . Ultrasound guidance versus anatomical landmarks for subclavian or femoral vein catheterization. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2015; 1: CD011447.

12.

Marcy

Figl

Ianessi

et al . Central and peripheral venous port catheters: evaluation of patients’ satisfaction under local anesthesia. J Vasc Access 2010; 11(2): 177–178.

13.

Borst

de Kruif

van Dam

et al . Totally implantable venous access ports–the patients’ point of view. A quality control study. Cancer Nurs 1992; 15(5): 378–381.

14.

Johansson

Engervall

Bjorvell

et al . Patients’ perceptions of having a central venous catheter or a totally implantable subcutaneous port system-results from a randomised study in acute leukaemia. Support Care Cancer 2009; 17(2): 137–143.

15.

Montgomery

David

Winkel

et al . The effectiveness of adjunctive hypnosis with surgical patients: a meta-analysis. Anesth Analg 2002; 94(6): 1639–1645.

16.

Schnur

Kafer

Marcus

et al . Hypnosis to manage distress related to medical procedures: a meta-analysis. Contemp Hypn 2008; 25(3–4): 114–128.

17.

Mansfield

Hohn

Fornage

et al . Complications and failures of subclavian-vein catheterization. N Engl J Med 1994; 331(26): 1735–1738.

18.

Biffi

Orsi

Pozzi

et al . Best choice of central venous insertion site for the prevention of catheter-related complications in adult patients who need cancer therapy: a randomized trial. Ann Oncol 2009; 20(5): 935–940.

19.

Orci

Meier

Morel

et al . Systematic review and meta-analysis of percutaneous subclavian vein puncture versus surgical venous cutdown for the insertion of a totally implantable venous access device. Br J Surg 2014; 101(2): 8–16.

20.

Kluge

Stroh

Wagner

et al . [The fluoroscopy-guided implantation of subcutaneous venous ports: the complications and long-term results]. Rofo 1998; 169(1): 63–67.

21.

Biffi

Pozzi

Cenciarelli

et al . Treatment of pneumothorax as a complication of long-term central venous port placement in oncology patients. An observational study. J Vasc Access 2001; 2(3): 129–136.

22.

Fischer

Knebel

Schroder

et al . Reasons for explantation of totally implantable access ports: a multivariate analysis of 385 consecutive patients. Ann Surg Oncol 2008; 15(4): 1124–1129.

23.

Knebel

Lopez-Benitez

Fischer

et al . Insertion of totally implantable venous access devices: an expertise-based, randomized, controlled trial (NCT00600444). Ann Surg 2011; 253(6): 1111–1117.

24.

Biffi

Pozzi

Bonomo

et al . Cost effectiveness of different central venous approaches for port placement and use in adult oncology patients: evidence from a randomized three-arm trial. Ann Surg Oncol 2014; 21(12): 3725–3731.

25.

Cramer

Lauche

Paul

et al . Hypnosis in breast cancer care: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials. Integr Cancer Ther 2015; 14(1): 5–15.

26.

DiMatteo

Lepper

Croghan

TW.

Depression is a risk factor for noncompliance with medical treatment: meta-analysis of the effects of anxiety and depression on patient adherence. Arch Intern Med 2000; 160(14): 2101–2107.