Abstract
Background:
The peripherally inserted central catheter-port (PICC-port) technique is an innovation of the standard arm-totally implantable vascular access device. The design of surgical skin incision may have an important impact on the postoperative life of patients, the cosmetic result is important for patient satisfaction as well.
Objectives:
To compare two different incision methods in the implantation of PICC-port.
Design:
A before-after study.
Settings and participants:
A total of 62 adult patients with malignant tumor requiring chemotherapy in Shanghai General Hospital were selected by convenience sampling, 31 in each group. All participants agreed to install PICC-port with signature from 1 Jan to 30 April, 2022.
Methods:
31 patients were given longitudinal incision, about 3 cm below the puncture point obliquely. Another 31 patients were given transverse incision, about 3 cm below the puncture point. T-test, chi-square test and rank sum test were used to compare the differences between the two groups in incision healing, scar score, and operation time.
Results:
There was no statistically significant difference in incision healing between the two groups(p > 0.05). The scar scores of patients with transverse incision were higher than that of patients with longitudinal incision at 3 months (p < 0.05). And the operation time of longitudinal incision group was longer than that of transverse incision group(p < 0.05).
Conclusions:
Our study revealed that PICC-port implantation could be considered as safe as PICC insertion conducted by nurse. During our follow-up, all patients with PICC-port implantation had good wound healing, and there were no complications such as local infection happened. The transverse incision was more easier to be operated in bag making in PICC-port implantation.
Keywords
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.