['Peripheral ports represent a new option for central venous access that have a low complication rate while providing long duration. This study provides five years of evaluation of this device.', 'All patients had follow-up evaluation concurrently, with detailed information collected for the first 70 patients. Data were maintained by a nurse specialist team with periodic questionnaires sent to treating physicians for follow-up information. Port duration, complications, ease of placement, patient and staff acceptance, and comparative costs were evaluated. Methods of placement evolved during the past five years and culminated in the described approach.', 'One hundred forty ports were evaluated. The mean duration was 343 days, with 45 ports in place longer than one year. The median port duration in patients without acquired immunodeficiency syndrome was 950 days. The overall complication rate was 1.76/1,000 days. The infection rate was very low at 0.32/1,000 days, and the rate of phlebitis was 0.16/1,000 days. Only 9 percent of the ports were removed for complications, which included infection and thrombosis. Because of the ease of insertion, 80 percent of the ports are placed outside the hospital, allowing for cost savings when compared with central ports.'] Are peripheral ports a new option for central venous access?