View Single Post
Old 01-05-2013, 06:52 AM   #9
Paula O
Senior Member
 
Paula O's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 954
Re: Arm port versus chest port

To answer Tricia's and Janis' questions: the arm port doesn't interfere with any excercise or swimming, doesnt get in the way, and isn't any more prone to infections than the chest port as it is surgically implanted BELOW the skin like a standard chest port--nothing at all is external. I put on lidocaine cream before appointments (GREAT stuff--way better than injectable IMHO) so access is pain-free. I like that the little scar or any bruising after access is so unnoticable-because it's tucked away out of view above the elbow crease on the inner SIDE part of the arm closest to the body, I've never bumped it and it barely shows. The only "maintenance" is a heparin flush after infusions or periodically to keep the line open if you are done with treatment. Again, like a chest port, there's nothing external.

I had one breast removed and it is in the opposite arm.

My breast surgeon inserts both chest and arm ports but strongly prefers arm passports and mostly does them --what she told me was that her opinion and expperience is that it is less risky, has less complications, and her patients like them a whole lot better so I was glad to be offered the option. I've never had a chest port to compare it to. I do have a couple friends with very uncomfortable chest ports like Karen described but it seems most people don't have any problems with their chest ports. I suppose any port anywhere ccould be uncomfotable or get infected or have a vessel develop thrombophebitis/clot, etc.

Like So Cal Gal said, even choosing not to have a port at all is an option that some people prefer.

I look forward to being port-free soon but was glad I got the kind I had and just wanted to let others know that it is another option out there and is a terrific alternative to a chest port IMHO.

Paula
Paula O is offline   Reply With Quote