ArticleWorld journal of surgery2019
Which is Better for Patients with Breast Cancer: Totally Implanted Vascular Access Devices (TIVAD) or Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter (PICC)?
Article in World journal of surgery, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 3 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Safety of totally implantable venous access devices and peripherally inserted central catheters in hematological malignancies patients: a meta-analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Pooled it
- Peripherally inserted central catheters versus implantable port catheters for cancer patients: a meta-analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Pooled it
- Adult oncology patients' experiences of living with a central venous catheter: a systematic review and meta-synthesis.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2022Pooled it
- Multicenter evaluation of anatomical landmark versus technology-assisted techniques for chemotherapy venous access device implantation.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Case Report: A successful multidisciplinary approach to doxorubicin extravasation from a PICC-port in a patient with breast cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- A simple calculation formula for the insertion depth of catheter of the central venous access port in Chinese patients.Heliyon · 2024Article
- Basilic vein variation encountered during surgery for arm vein port: A case report.World journal of clinical cases · 2024Article
- Follow up of utility and value of totally implantable chemotherapy catheter in 233 brazilian patients receiving chemotherapy to treat cancer.Revista do Colegio Brasileiro de Cirurgioes · 2023Article
- Tailored approach to the choice of long-term vascular access in breast cancer patients.PloS one · 2021Article
- Perioperative and Postoperative Complications of Supraclavicular, Ultrasound-Guided, Totally Implantable Venous Access Port via the Brachiocephalic Vein in Adult Patients: A Retrospective Multicentre Study.Therapeutics and clinical risk management · 2021Article
- Which is Better for Patients with Breast Cancer: Totally Implanted Vascular Access Devices (TIVAD) or Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter (PICC)?World journal of surgery · 2020Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOur aim was to compare the applications of totally implanted vascular access devices (TIVAD) and peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) in breast cancer patients.
methodsWe analyzed 4080 cases of TIVAD and 1433 cases of PICC at the Breast Center of the Fourth Hospital of Hebei Medical University. The success rate, operation time, and procedures of catheterization, as well as the catheterization-related complications, catheter indwelling-related complications, and the utilization conditions were compared between these two methods.
resultsOur results showed that the success rate of catheterization was relatively higher in PICC group (99.5%) than the TIVAD group (99.0%)(χ
conclusionsBased on these analyses, we recommended TIVAD for the patients who need long-term and high-dose chemotherapy and PICC for the patients who need short chemotherapy cycle and live close to the hospital.
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.