Retrospective Analysis Of Complications Following Central Venous Port Insertions: A Single Institution Experience.

e18767 Background: Central venous access devices, specifically implantable ports, play an essential role in the care of oncology patients. Despite their routine use in cancer patients complications related to insertion and management of these devices remain prevalent. This retrospective single-institutional review was performed to identify rates of complications from port placement, and potential factors associated with these events Methods: Retrospective analysis of 539 cancer patients who underwent port insertion between 3/2016 and 3/2017 at the University of Florida was conducted. Data examining 18 potentially predictive factors was collected, and multivariate analysis was conducted using logistic regression and odds ratios with standard errors to determine predictive factors Results: Out of 539 patients, 100 patients (19%) experienced a complication, and 12 patients (2%) experienced 2 or more complications. An overall lower rate of complications was seen in patients on therapeutic anticoagulation (OR 0.17, p < 0.001, 95% CI 0.06-0.49) or on antiplatelet agents (OR 0.47, p = 0.02, 95% CI 0.25-0.90). No patients on therapeutic anticoagulation developed VTE (0%). Right-sided port insertion was associated with decreased rates of infection (OR 0.44, p = 0.04, 95% CI 0.20-0.96). Insertion as inpatient was associated with increased risk for mechanical failure (OR 4.60, p < 0.01, 95% CI 1.66-12.80) Conclusions: This analysis identified multiple predictive factors that can potentially put patients at higher risk of experiencing a complication from port insertion. Intuitively our data shows lower rates of VTE complications for patients on anticoagulation or antiplatelet therapy. This emphasizes that a thorough risk assessment for VTE should be done in all patients receiving a port and an individualized approach (ie prior VTE, Khorana score > 3) should be considered for prophylactic anticoagulation. Further analysis is also necessary to determine why port insertion as an inpatient places patients at higher risk of complications. This study highlights the risks associated with port placement and prompts the clinician to have an informed discussion with the patient weighing the risks and benefits