ArticleIrish journal of medical science2020
Complications and pitfalls of central venous port catheters: experience with 782 patients with cancer.
Article in Irish journal of medical science, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- When to remove implantable vascular access ports? a retrospective analysis of 376 patients with breast cancer and implantable vascular access ports.BMC surgery · 2025Article
- Central venous access device terminologies, complications, and reason for removal in oncology: a scoping review.BMC cancer · 2024Article
- 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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe clinical use of port catheters has become widespread because they provide a safe and easy vascular route. Such widespread use of vascular port catheters has revealed early and late complications.
aimThis study was evaluated the early and late noninfectious complications and present precautions and pitfalls to handle these complications.
methodsThe retrospective observational study comprised 801 vascular port catheters inserted into 782 adult patients for various reasons between 2010 and 2018. Patient demographic, indications for port catheter implantation, port catheter types, and insertion sides were noted. Port catheter implantation related early and late complications were recorded.
resultsThe subclavian vein was selected as a target vein in almost all of the interventions (98.9%). Similarly, right-sided veins were used in about 90% of patients. The most common problem was technical issues related to the interventions. If venous cannulation was challenging, ultrasonography and fluoroscopy guidance roadmap technique were used. Most serious complication was pneumothorax in 7 patients. In the late period, the most common problem was thrombotic occlusion of the catheter. In two-thirds of these patients, thrombolytic therapy for thrombosed port catheters may rescue some catheters and avoid secondary port catheter insertions.
conclusionsDespite these benefits, port catheters are associated with various complications. However, most of these complications can be effectively prevented by proper techniques and easily applied precautions.
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.