Vascular Access in Cancer Patients - PICC vs PORT in a Randomized Controlled Trial.

Status

Completed

Phases

Study type

Interventional

Source

ClinicalTrials.gov

Registry ID

NCT01971021

Enrollment

400

Registered

2013-10-28

Start date

2013-04-30

Completion date

Unknown

Last updated

2018-01-30

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Focus of Study

Brief summary

As of today there is very limited scientific knowledge in whicj of the two vascular access devices (PICC-line or venous ports) that offers the lowest complicationrates in cancerpatients. The study group wants to clearify this unsolved matter by comparing the two systems. Our primary endpoint is the presens of catheter related venous thrombosis. We are also looking at all catheter related complications and patient satisfaction.

Interventions

DEVICEPICC or subcutaneous venous port

Study design

Allocation

RANDOMIZED

Intervention model

PARALLEL

Primary purpose

SUPPORTIVE_CARE

Masking

DOUBLE (Investigator, Outcomes Assessor)

Intervention model description

open label pragmatic

Eligibility

Sex/Gender

ALL

Age

18 Years to 120 Years

Healthy volunteers

Inclusion criteria

* cancer treatment with need for central venous access * Age \>18 yrs * Suspected survival \> 4 weeks * Need of central venous access \>4 weeks

Exclusion criteria

* Ongoing uncontrolled systemic infection * Prescence of significant thrombosis/stenosis in arm or central veins * Unability to communicate * Probable upcoming need for dialysis fistula

Design outcomes

Primary

Measure	Time frame	Description
The occurence of catheter related venous thrombosis	Upon clinical suspiscion during the one the patient i enrolled in the study	regular follow-ups at month 1, 3, 6 and 12.

Countries

Sweden

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Mar 3, 2026