Purpose: To compare the port infection rate between single-lumen (SL) and double-lumen (DL) ports and to determine whether the use of a DL port is an independent risk factor for port infection among patients with cancer.
Materials and methods: This retrospective study included 2,573 adult oncologic patients (aged >18 years) who had either a SL (n = 841) or a DL (n = 1,732) chest port implanted between 2013 and 2020 at a single institution. Patients who had port infection, including port-site infection and port-related bloodstream infection, were identified through chart review. After propensity score matching based on 13 potentially confounding variables, a total of 493 pairs of patients with either SL (SL group) or DL (DL group) ports were subjected to analysis. The port infection rate was compared between the 2 groups using Poisson regression. Multivariate proportional subdistribution hazards regression (PSHREG) analysis was conducted to determine whether use of a DL port is an independent risk factor for port infection.
Results: The cumulative follow-up period for the matched cohort was 371,853 catheter-days (median, 297 catheter-days per port; range, 0-1,903 catheter-days). The port infection rate of the DL group was significantly higher than that of the SL group (0.232 vs 0.113 infections per 1,000 catheter-days; P = .001). PSHREG analysis demonstrated that use of a DL port was an independent risk factor of port infection (subdistribution hazard ratio, 2.30; 95% CI, 1.33-3.78; P = .002).
Conclusions: DL ports were associated with a higher risk of port infection compared with SL ports in adult oncologic patients.
Copyright © 2023 SIR. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.