Forum topic

2 posts / 0 new
Last post
Robbin George

Is/Are there any Research/Evidenced Based documents you can reference to support a policy

for NOT using an implanted PORT for continuous TPN re infection control and/or other issues

Thank you in Advance for your responses

Robbin George RN

Vascular Access Resouce Dept Alexandria Hospital Virginia

Implanted ports have the

Implanted ports have the lowest rates of BSI, so that argument to avoid PN through a port would not really be supported. There are also reports of long-term PN patients with implanted ports who remove the needle daily and insert a new one at night for cyclic PN. They do not want to have any portion of an external catheter to manage during the day. The risk factors with using an implanted port would be inadequate stabilization of the port access needle with extravasation injury and tissue necrosis. I think it should definitely be a patient's choice for long term PN infusion. For short-term infusion, if an implanted port is already in place, I see no reason as to why it should not be used for PN. The limitations in this situation would be other meds that would be needed. If only a single port is in place, another line of some type may be needed to avoid infusing any other fluids through a PN line. Lynn

Lynn Hadaway, M.Ed., RN, BC, CRNI

Lynn Hadaway Associates, Inc.

126 Main Street, PO Box 10

Milner, GA 30257


Office Phone 770-358-7861

Log in or register to post comments