Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 21, 2025

Author Spotlight: Hickman Catheter Use for Long-Term Vascular Access in a Preclinical Swine Model
Published on: March 31, 2023
Tunnelled external versus implanted port central venous catheters in paediatric oncology: a systematic review and
Jonathan J Neville1, Hinn Moe Aye2, Nigel J Hall3
1University Surgery Unit, Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Insights
Implanted ports (PORTs) reduce infectious and mechanical complications for pediatric cancer patients compared to tunnelled external central venous catheters (CVCs). PORTs also lead to fewer premature removals, improving patient outcomes.
Area of Science:
- Pediatric Oncology
- Medical Devices
- Clinical Research
Background:
- Central venous catheters (CVCs) are crucial for administering chemotherapy and supportive care in pediatric cancer patients.
- Both tunnelled external CVCs and implanted ports (PORTs) are commonly used, each with potential complications.
- Evaluating and comparing the safety and efficacy of different CVC types is essential for optimizing patient care.
Purpose of the Study:
- To systematically review and compare the complications associated with tunnelled external CVCs versus PORTs in children with cancer.
- To identify which CVC type offers a better safety profile regarding infection, mechanical failure, and other adverse events.
- To provide evidence-based recommendations for CVC selection in pediatric oncology.
Main Methods:
- A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted following PRISMA guidelines.
- Databases searched included MEDLINE, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library.
- Included studies compared tunnelled external CVCs and PORTs in patients ≤18 years with malignancies, analyzing outcomes like infection, mechanical failure, and removal rates.
Main Results:
- Tunnelled external CVCs were associated with a significantly increased risk of systemic infection (OR 2.10) and mechanical complications (OR 2.47).
- No significant difference was found in localized infection rates between the two CVC types.
- Tunnelled external CVCs also showed a higher risk of premature device removal (OR 3.24) compared to PORTs.
Conclusions:
- Implanted ports (PORTs) are associated with a reduced risk of infectious and mechanical complications compared to tunnelled external CVCs in pediatric cancer patients.
- PORTs demonstrate a lower overall risk of premature device removal.
- Further prospective randomized trials are needed to confirm these findings and evaluate cost-effectiveness and patient/caregiver acceptability.
Objective:
To evaluate and compare the complications associated with tunnelled external and implanted port (PORT) central venous catheters (CVCs) in children with cancer.
Design:
A systematic review in accordance with PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols) guidelines was performed (pre-registered on PROSPERO: CRD42022300869). MEDLINE, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library databases were searched.
Patients:
Patients ≤18 years of age with haematological or solid malignancies.
Interventions:
Studies comparing tunnelled external and PORT CVCs.
Main Outcomes Measures:
Infection, mechanical failure, thrombosis, bleeding, acceptability, quality of life (QoL), cost, premature removal, and days from insertion to removal for any reason.
Results:
Twenty-three observational studies met the inclusion criteria, representing 6644 devices and 6032 patients. Tunnelled external CVCs were associated with an increased risk for systemic infection (OR 2.10, 95% CI 1.59 to 2.77, p<0.001, 16 studies, 3425 devices). There was no significant difference in the risk of localised infection (OR 1.15, 95% CI 0.66 to 2.01, p=0.62, 5 studies, 979 devices). Tunnelled external CVCs were also associated with a significantly increased risk of mechanical complications (OR 2.47, 95% CI 1.21 to 5.05, p=0.01, 11 studies, 2187 devices) and premature device removal (OR 3.24, 95% CI 1.28 to 8.22, p=0.01, 6 studies, 1514 devices).
Conclusion:
This study shows that PORTs associate with a reduced risk of infectious and mechanical complications, and a lower overall risk of removal, compared with tunnelled external CVCs in children with cancer. Further work is required to confirm these findings in a prospective randomised trial and to compare cost implications and acceptability to patients and caregivers.
More Related Videos
09:57A Protocol to Set Up Needle-Free Connector with Positive Displacement on Central Venous Catheter in Intensive Care Unit
Published on: July 13, 2019
07:47The Supraclavicular Fossa Ultrasound View for Central Venous Catheter Placement and Catheter Change Over Guidewire
Published on: December 23, 2014
Related Concept Videos
Parentral Nutrition: Centeral and Peripheral Parental Nutrition
PN can be administered through two primary routes:
1. Central Parenteral Nutrition (CPN):
CPN involves delivering a high concentration of nutrients through a large vein. This is typically achieved using a Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter (PICC) or,...
Hemodialysis II: Procedure and Complications
Hemodialysis I: Introduction