Abstract 4988: Port flushes in oncology - Does frequency matter?
Authors: Shabbir Haiderbhai, Julia Parrish, Grace Lavandowska, Megan Kelly, Aarabhi Gurumoorthy, Anu Gaba
Journal: Cancer Research (2025)

Abstract Background: Ports, a type of central venous access device, are frequently used for the administration of intravenous medications, such as chemotherapy. These devices can remain in place for extended periods of time, from several months to years. To reduce the risk of complications, manufacturers recommend routine maintenance, often through monthly heparin flushes which leads to frequent visits to health care settings, adding to the burden and cost of care for both the patient and the healthcare system. The COVID-19 pandemic necessitated decreasing the frequency of port flushes to every 3 months when possible. The aim of this study was to evaluate if extending the interval between heparin flushes impacted safety outcomes. Methods: A retrospective chart review study was performed utilizing patient data from a single cancer center. Medical records were abstracted for patients with the following characteristics; a diagnosis of malignancy, ≥ 18 years of age, not on current chemotherapy, port placement greater than 30 days prior to enrollment, at least 6 months of follow-up data, and at least one successful port flush within the 6-month study period. The control group (CG) consisted of patients with a standard port flush interval of 4 weeks vs the experimental group (EG) that received an extended interval of every 12 weeks. The primary outcome was port removal, and the secondary outcome was complications of any kind (discomfort, erythema, use of tPA, thrombus, and infection). Descriptive statistics were used to summarize data, with Pearson’s chi-square or Fisher’s exact tests utilized to calculate group differences. Results: Of the 1,162 patients who were initially screened for eligibility, 215 patients were included in the analysis: 69 in the CG and 146 in the EG. The average port flush interval was 30.97 days in the CG and 86.21 days in the EG. In the CG, 4 patients (5.8%) required port removal due to complications, compared to 3 patients (2.05%) in the EG (p=0.21). Twelve (17.4%) patients in the CG had port-related complications as compared to 3 patients (2.05%) in the EG (p=0.001). The complications evaluated were discomfort (n=1 in CG), erythema (n=1 in CG, n=1 in EG), infection (n=1 in CG), port malfunction (n=5 in CG, n=2 in EG), thrombus (n=2 in CG), and use of tPA (n=5 in CG). Conclusion: Our findings suggest that extending the interval between port maintenance flushes from 4 to 12 weeks may lead to lower port-related complications. While the results are promising, the study was limited by the relatively small sample size due to strict inclusion and exclusion criteria. Adopting a 12-week flushing interval may improve the quality of life of cancer patients by reducing the frequency of clinic visits and may also lower healthcare costs for patients and hospitals alike. This extended interval approach is a promising step towards patient-centered care, improving overall healthcare efficiency while maintaining safety. Citation Format: Shabbir Haiderbhai, Julia Parrish, Grace Lavandowska, Megan Kelly, Aarabhi Gurumoorthy, Anu Gaba. Port flushes in oncology - Does frequency matter [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2025; Part 1 (Regular Abstracts); 2025 Apr 25-30; Chicago, IL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2025;85(8_Suppl_1):Abstract nr 4988.