Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 18, 2026
Computed Tomography (CT) Guided Implantation of a Totally Implantable Venous Access Port (TIVAP) through Subclavian Vein
Published on: January 13, 2026
High pressure versus standard port system: comparison of implantation and complications
Cédric Plumhans1, Christina Ocklenburg, Frederik A Verburg
1Department of Radiology, University Hospital, RWTH-Aachen University, Aachen, Germany.
Introduction:
Completely implantable access ports for high pressure contrast media injection have been in use in clinical routine for a relatively short time. The purpose of our study was to compare a high pressure port system with a standard port system with regard to implantation and complications.
Methods:
In 94 oncological patients a completely implantable access port was implanted. Patients (n = 49) planned for oncological follow-up computed tomography (CT) received a high pressure port system. Other patients (n = 45) received a standard port system. Intrainterventional pain perception, postinterventional catheter tip migration and complications were analyzed.
Results:
No major periinterventional complications occurred. Intrainterventional pain perception was not significantly different between the two groups. A significantly lower rate of tip migration was observed in the high pressure port group (P = 0.03) and when the port system was implanted on the right side (P = 0.03). In the standard port group catheter occlusion occurred in three patients (7%) and a catheter loop in one patient (2%) whereas no such complications occurred within the high pressure port group. Venous thrombosis was detected in one patient (2%) with a high pressure port; this did not occur in the standard port group.
Conclusions:
Implantation and use of a high pressure port device is safe and reliable: the complications are comparable to those of a standard port device. High pressure port systems should be considered for implantation, especially in patients who will require frequent CTs.
