Abstract
Catheter rupture or displacement is a serious and rare complication of central venous catheterization, with an incidence of approximately 1%. Once the intravascular foreign body is found, it should be removed as soon as possible. This study investigated the safety and efficacy of endovascular techniques for the removal of intravascular foreign bodies. This was a retrospective analysis of 23 patients with intravascular foreign bodies admitted to our hospital from January 2009 to June 2019 summarizing the types and locations of foreign bodies and the removal techniques. Overall Twenty-three cases of intravascular foreign bodies were successfully treated with endovascular techniques, for a technical success rate of 100%. The types of foreign bodies included 14 infusion port catheters (60.9%), 6 peripherally inserted central catheters (26.1%), 2 temporary deep vein catheters (8.7%), and 1 intravenous stent (4.3%). The most common orientation of foreign body displacement was one end of the foreign body in the inferior vena cava and the other end in the right atrium (14/23, 60.9%). In terms of technique, all patients underwent removal procedures with only one venous access point. The operative time ranged from 6 to 153 min, with an average of 28.7 min. This study preliminarily demonstrates the safety and efficacy of percutaneous interventional intravascular foreign body removal. Endovascular techniques are minimally invasive and reliable and can be used to safely and effectively remove intravascular foreign bodies.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Background
Central venous catheterization (CVC) is currently widely used clinically. Its main uses include chemotherapeutic drug infusion, parenteral nutrition support, and intravenous infusion in patients with poor peripheral vascular conditions. As the use of CVC increases annually, there are an increasing number of cases of rupture, shedding, and displacement. Catheter rupture or displacement is a serious and rare complication of CVC, with an incidence of approximately 1% [1]. However, in most cases, catheter rupture or displacement was asymptomatic and only found during routine catheter maintenance or chest fluoroscopy. In addition, a small number of patients would experience local swelling, endocarditis or even pulmonary embolism, cardiac perforation, cardiac arrest, etc.; thus, once the intravascular foreign body was found, it should be removed as soon as possible [2, 3]. This study investigated the safety and efficacy of endovascular techniques in the removal of intravascular foreign bodies.
Patients and Methods
Patients
This was a case series analysis which includes 23 patients with intravascular foreign bodies admitted to our hospital from January 2009 to June 2019. All the patients were included retrospectively according to historical patient records. The inclusion criteria were as follows: 1. all patients had complete medical records and preoperative imaging examinations; 2. the whole foreign body was located in the blood vessel; and 3. only an endovascular technique was used for removal. The exclusion criteria were as follows: 1. some part of the foreign body was found outside the blood vessel; and 2. any technique other than an endovascular technique was used for removal, such as open surgery.
Methods
An Innova IGS 540 (GE, US) angiography machine was used as the guiding device. The puncture point was determined according to the position of the foreign body, and venous puncture was performed by the modified Seldinger’s technique. The types of the catcher mainly included the clover-type catcher (En Snare, MERIT Medical, USA) and the gooseneck-type catcher (Günther Tulip, COOK Medical, Denmark). Angiography was performed after removal to confirm that there were no serious complications, such as rupture, perforation, or bleeding. Technical success is defined as successful removal of the intravascular foreign body with no serious complications, such as hemorrhage or tissue damage, during or after surgery.
This study was approved by the Ethical Review Committee of Peking University First Hospital, Beijing, China (no. 2019研177). All patients signed informed consent forms before their removal procedures.
Results
Twenty-three cases of intravascular foreign bodies were successfully treated with endovascular techniques. No serious complications occurred during or after surgery. The technical success rate was 100%. All patient characteristics are shown in Table 1. The types of foreign bodies included 14 infusion port catheters (60.9%), 6 peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) (26.1%), 2 temporary deep vein catheters (8.7%), and 1 intravenous stent (4.3%). The most common orientation of foreign body displacement was one end of the foreign body in the inferior vena cava (IVC) and the other end in the right atrium (RA) (14/23, 60.9%); the second was the whole foreign body in the RA (5/23, 21.7%); the third was one end of the foreign body located in the superior vena cava (SVC) and the other end in the RA (3/23, 13%). In terms of technique, all patients underwent removal procedures with only one venous access point; 22 patients chose the right femoral approach (22/23, 95.7%), and 1 patient chose the right internal jugular vein approach (1/23, 4.3%). Among all twenty-three catchers, twenty (20/23, 87%) were clover-type catchers (En Snare, MERIT Medical, USA), and the other three (3/23, 13%) were gooseneck-type catchers (Günther Tulip, COOK Medical, Denmark). The operative time ranged from 6 to 153 min, with an average of 28.7 min. In addition, among all procedures, five removal procedures were assisted by pigtail catheters; two procedures were completed by “guide wire assistance” and an “indirect capture technique,” which are detailed below.
Discussion
The results show that endovascular techniques can be used to remove intravascular foreign bodies safely and effectively and that these techniques are minimally invasive, reliable, easy to perform, and have low complication rates. With popularization and rapid development, intravascular techniques should be preferred for the removal of intravascular foreign bodies [4,5,6].
In recent years, with advancements in medical equipment and technology, the incidence of iatrogenic intravascular foreign bodies has gradually increased. In clinical work, we should avoid or reduce the fracture and ectopic placement of vascular implants as much as possible and detect intravascular foreign bodies in a timely manner [7]. The vast majority of intravascular foreign bodies removed in our center in the past decade were central venous catheters. By reviewing the medical history, we found that most patients underwent CVC because of the need for chemotherapy, which meant that the catheters would remain indwelling for a long time. According to our data, 56.5% (13/23) of the catheters remained indwelling for more than 12 months. In addition, some patients with longer catheter indwelling times lacked routine maintenance, which might increase the likelihood of catheter breakage or displacement [8]. Moreover, rupture might occur due to compression in the narrow space between the clavicle and the first rib, so-called clipping syndrome, which is more common in patients with infusion ports. In response to this situation, it has been suggested that the use of the jugular vein or subclavian vein approach could effectively prevent the occurrence of clipping syndrome. In terms of the displacement position, 60% of the foreign bodies were located in the RA, while the other end extended into the IVC. In this scenario, the foreign body could usually be removed by grasping the end in the IVC. Another 22% of foreign bodies were found in the RA, and these cases were prone to serious complications, such as arrhythmia, cardiac arrest, and even heart rupture during the removal procedure. Therefore, the removal process should be performed very carefully and meticulously. In terms of the operative time, the average time for all 23 procedures was 28.7 min. Among all procedures, two procedures lasted more than 100 min: in one case, a fractured PICC was displaced in a complicated position, with both ends of the catheter in the branches of the pulmonary arteries and the middle part of the catheter twisted in the trunk of the pulmonary artery (Fig. 1); in the other case, a metal stent was found in the RA, which had been displaced from the SVC (Fig. 2). These two removal procedures were difficult, and we tried to use the guide wire to wrap the foreign body and used the catcher to catch the free end of the guide wire to successfully remove the foreign body. A similar method has been previously reported [9, 10].
This study preliminarily demonstrates the safety and efficacy of percutaneous interventional intravascular foreign body removal. In short, endovascular techniques are minimally invasive and reliable and can be used to safely and effectively remove intravascular foreign bodies.
References
Smouse HB, Fox PF, Brady TM et al (2000) Intravascular foreign body removal. Semin Interv Radiol 17(2):201–212
Wolf F, Schernthaner RE, Dirisamer A et al (2008) Endovascular management of lost or misplaced intravascular objects: experiences of 12 years. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 31(3):563–568
Motta Leal Filho JM, Carnevale FC, Nasser F et al (2010) Endovascular techniques and procedures, methods for removal of intravascular foreign bodies. Rev Bras Cir Cardiovasc 25(2):202–208
Rodrigues R, Agostinho A, Anacleto G et al (2017) Endovascular removal of foreign bodies. Rev Port Cir Cardiotorac Vasc 24(3–4):109
Rossi UG, Rollandi GA, Ierardi AM et al (2019) Materials and techniques for percutaneous retrieval of intravascular foreign bodies. J Vasc Access 20(1):87–94
Zhong-ying Xu, Hai-bo Hu, Jiang S-L et al (2005) Treatment of interventional complications with percutaneous intracavitary foreign body removal: a report of 12 cases. Chin Heart J 02:174
Floridi C, Nocchi-Cardim L, De Chiara M et al (2015) Intravascular foreign bodies: what the radiologist needs to know. Semin Ultrasound CT MR 36(1):73–79
Surov A, Jordan K, Buerke M et al (2006) Atypical pulmonary embolism of port catheter fragments in oncology patients. Support Care Cancer 14(5):479–483
Ayx I, Goessmann H, Hubauer H et al (2016) Interventional Removal of Intravascular Medical Devices: Methods and Technical Success. Rofo 188(6):566–573
Liu X-Q, Guo P-F, Zhang J-C et al (2012) Treatment of iatrogenic intravascular foreign body: Experience of 15 cases. Chin J Interv Imaging Ther 9(07):508–511
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
TS Lyu made substantial contributions to the conception and design of the study and drafting of the manuscript. SJ Cao made substantial contributions to the analysis and interpretation of data. L Song and J Wang substantially contributed to the data acquisition and analysis. XQ Tong revised the manuscript critically for important intellectual content and was involved in data acquisition and analysis. YH Zou was involved in the conception and design of the study, data interpretation and analysis, and revising the manuscript for intellectual content. All authors gave final approval of the version to be published. All authors agreed to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Consent to Participate
For this type of study, formal consent is not required. Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
Consent for Publication
Consent for publication was obtained for every person’s data included in the study.
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Lyu, T., Cao, S., Wang, J. et al. Endovascular Removal of Foreign Bodies: Single Center Experience. Indian J Surg 85 (Suppl 1), 254–258 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12262-022-03395-3
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12262-022-03395-3