ArticleBMC cancer2016
Internal jugular vein versus subclavian vein as the percutaneous insertion site for totally implantable venous access devices: a meta-analysis of comparative studies.
Article in BMC cancer, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
20 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 41 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparing internal jugular vein and subclavian vein for central venous insertion of implantable ports in cancer chemotherapy: a meta-analysis of RCTs.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Pooled it
- Central venous catheterization site choice based on anatomical landmark technique: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of anesthesia · 2021Pooled it
- Multicenter evaluation of anatomical landmark versus technology-assisted techniques for chemotherapy venous access device implantation.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Retrospective Analysis of Totally Implantable Venous Access Ports which was Performed using the Patient's Height as a Guide, and the Effect of Catheter Tip Position on Complications.Turkish journal of anaesthesiology and reanimation · 2026Article
- Comparative safety outcomes of three venous access routes for totally implantable venous access port placement and exploratory assessment of pre-removal catheter-related thrombosis in breast cancer patients.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Pinch-off syndrome leading to catheter fracture: a rare complication of central venous port systems, a case report.BJR case reports · 2026Article
- Research progress and narrative review of totally implantable venous access ports.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Review
- Evaluating Rivaroxaban for Thromboprophylaxis in Cancer Patients with Long-Term Venous Access Devices: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Vascular health and risk management · 2025Article
- Application of pocket-first technique for implantation of totally implantable venous access ports.BMC surgery · 2024Article
- Clinical application of ultrasound-guided totally implantable venous access ports implantation via the posterior approach of the internal jugular vein.Journal of the Chinese Medical Association : JCMA · 2024Article
- A case of percutaneous retrieval of a catheter without a free end that was fractured during a totally implantable venous access port removal.Radiology case reports · 2023Article
- Impact of central venous port implantation method and access choice on outcomes.World journal of clinical cases · 2023Article
- Tunneled Hemodialysis Catheter Insertion: Technical and Clinical Considerations.The Indian journal of radiology & imaging · 2023Review
- Article
- Perioperative and Postoperative Complications of Ultrasound-Guided Totally Implantable Venous Access Ports via the Brachiocephalic Vein in Patients with Cancer: A Prospective Study.Journal of Cancer · 2021Article
- Assessment knowledge and practices of central line insertion and maintenance in adult intensive care units at a tertiary care hospital in Saudi Arabia.Journal of infection and public health · 2020Article
- Comparison between ultrasound-guided TIVAD via the right innominate vein and the right internal jugular vein approach.BMC surgery · 2019Article
- Ultrasound-guided totally implantable venous access ports via the right innominate vein: a new approach for patients with breast cancer.World journal of surgical oncology · 2019Article
- The use of port-a-caths in adult patients with Lysosomal Storage Disorders receiving Enzyme Replacement Therapy-one centre experience.Molecular genetics and metabolism reports · 2017Article
- Safety of Insertion of Percutaneous Totally Implantable Central Venous Access Devices by Surgical Residents.In vivo (Athens, Greece)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA totally implantable venous access device (TIVAD) provides reliable, long-term vascular access and improves patients' quality of life. The wide use of TIVADs is associated with important complications. A meta-analysis was undertaken to compare the internal jugular vein (IJV) with the subclavian vein (SCV) as the percutaneous access site for TIVAD to determine whether IJV has any advantages.
methodsAll randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies assessing the two access sites, IJV and SCV, were retrieved from PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and OVID EMB Reviews from their inception to December 2015. Random-effects models were used in all analyses. The endpoints evaluated included TIVAD-related infections, catheter-related thrombotic complications, and major mechanical complications.
resultsTwelve studies including 3905 patients published between 2008 and 2015, were included. Our meta-analysis showed that incidences of TIVAD-related infections (odds ratio [OR] 0.71, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 0.48-1.04, P = 0.081) and catheter-related thrombotic complications (OR 0.76, 95 % CI 0.38-1.51, P = 0.433) were not significantly different between the two groups. However, compared with SCV, IJV was associated with reduced risks of total major mechanical complications (OR 0.38, 95 % CI 0.24-0.61, P < 0.001). More specifically, catheter dislocation (OR 0.43, 95 % CI 0.22-0.84, P = 0.013) and malfunction (OR 0.42, 95 % CI 0.28-0.62, P < 0.001) were more prevalent in the SCV than in the IJV group; however, the risk of catheter fracture (OR 0.47, 95 % CI 0.21-1.05, P = 0.065) were not significantly different between the two groups. Sensitivity analyses using fixed-effects models showed a decreased risk of catheter fracture in the IJV group.
conclusionThe IJV seems to be a safer alternative to the SCV with lower risks of total major mechanical complications, catheter dislocation, and malfunction. However, a large-scale and well-designed RCT comparing the complications of each access site is warranted before the IJV site can be unequivocally recommended as a first choice for percutaneous implantation of a TIVAD.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.