Categorised under:
Interventional Radiology
>
Vascular
>
Venous ports
Did you know you can Register for FREE with this website?
Registration gives you full access to all of the features of WhichMedicalDevice. Find out more ...
WhichMedicalDevice is a FREE resource created by clinicians for clinicians.
Registration is free and gives you unlimited access to all of the content and features of this website.
Find out more...Registration is free and gives you unlimited access to all of the content and features of Which Medical Device. Find out more...
Which Medical Device is a community of clinicians sharing knowledge and experience of the devices and procedures we use on a daily basis. We ask that our members register with us so that we can maintain the unbiased and independent nature of our content. Registration is quick and free.
We do not make your details available to any third parties nor do we send unsolicited emails to our members. You can read our Privacy Policy here.
Comments
Comment by smabays Commented Nov 15, 2012
Impact factor: 84
User Rating
We used to use this as our main port, and it did work very well - some patients found the raised areas on the surface uncomfortable. It also has a large footprint, which can be undesirable. There are many other ports available, and we have moved to those manufactured by smiths medical, as they have all the good points of the powerport, but are smaller, and hence better tolerated by many of our patients.
Comment by phil Commented Sep 3, 2009
Impact factor: 5138
User Rating
Thanks Peter, we await the newer version with interest. (I note on your latest image that the hub is also very close to the skin). I have had one where the curve of the line (due to the way it is packeged) did cause a problem with the tip up against the svc/atrial wall.
Update: Just removed this port after two years. The palpation points were easily palpable but there was no evidence if skin erosion. Still awaiting the newer version however !
Comment by Peter Bream, Jr. Commented Sep 2, 2009
Impact factor: 46
User Rating
I have placed about 60 of these and overall like the port. However, we recently had one come back after 4-5 months with one of the nubs on the port surface eroded through the skin. I have heard of others having this problem. In addition, they package the port catheter in a tight coil. No matter how I place it in the patient, the catheter curves toward the atrial wall. In one patient it was so severe it caused SVT. Overall, I have liked this port and it has functioned well. We are evaluating other power injectable ports due to what we see is a design flaw. See the picture.
Update: I have now had three ports come back with erosion. I stopped placing this port and went with the Navylist port instead. It has performed well. It comes in four versions, I use the titanium low profile and titanium standard. I had one issue with the "CT" writing that came off before placing the port. It was a plastic one and now that I use the Titanium ones we haven't had a problem. BTW there will be a new version of the Bard product that has either just come out or will just come out that has lower profile nubs. I have been shown several prototypes over the past 6 months so even though it is a small problem, even Bard recognizes it and is changing their product. Here is the most recent one.
Comment by tenapp Commented Apr 6, 2009
Impact factor: 1
User Rating
The AirGuard Valved Introducer within the Power Port (reorder #1808000) does not peel away properly, completely encasing the catheter 50% of the time requiring manipulation/cutting and risking loosing access
Comment by paulr Commented Apr 1, 2008
Impact factor: 14
User Rating
Seems to be about the same price as some of the other ports out there.
Comment by rodo Commented Feb 2, 2008
Impact factor: 140
User Rating
great stuff......unique certified up to 5ml/sec power injection. too expensive