ArticleLa Radiologia medica2019
Retrospective outcome analysis of rates and types of complications after 8654 minimally invasive radiological port implantations via the subclavian vein without ultrasound guidance.
Article in La Radiologia medica, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pacemaker leads as a potential source of problems in patients who might need a central venous access port.Cardiovascular diagnosis and therapy · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the rate and types of complications after minimally invasive radiological central vein port implantation without ultrasound guidance. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe retrospectively evaluated 8654 patients who underwent port implantations in the subclavian vein without ultrasound guidance in our institution from 1998 to 2014 with regard to types and rates of peri-, early and late post-interventional complications according to the common classification for complications published by the Society of Interventional Radiology (SIR). Additionally, the impact of the training level of the operators on the rate of complications was analyzed.
resultsSuccessful port implantations were performed in 99.8% (8636/8654 procedures). From 1998 to 2014, a total of 565 (6.52%) complications were recorded. The overall percentage of the peri-, early and late post-interventional complications according to the SIR criteria was 1.69, 0.15 and 4.68, respectively. Significant differences due to the training level of the performing physician could be seen for the rates of pneumothorax, arterial puncture and hematoma.
conclusionMinimally invasive radiological interventional port implantation is a safe treatment option with a low rate of complications even without ultrasound guidance.
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.