ArticleCureus2022
Outcome Comparison of Totally Implantable Venous Access Device Insertions Between Surgeons and Radiologists in Australia.
Article in Cureus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background The need for chemotherapy treatment is increasing with the growing incidence of cancer worldwide. The insertion of totally implantable venous access devices (TIVADs) is commonly performed by surgeons and radiologists, but the procedures are not without complications. The primary outcome of this review outlines TIVAD insertion success and complication rates between general surgeons and radiologists. The secondary goal of this study is to help identify areas for improvement and consideration when performing TIVAD insertion. Methodology This was a descriptive, three-year, retrospective multicentre study of oncological patients who underwent TIVAD insertion by either general surgeons or radiologists at two peripheral Brisbane hospitals. Results Surgeons performed 61 percutaneous subclavian vein cannulations, 29 ultrasound-guided internal jugular veins, and seven open cephalic veins cut-down TIVAD insertions (n=97). Overall surgical success was 81.4%, with the internal jugular (89.7%) having the highest success rate followed by the open cut-down (85.7) and subclavian approaches (77.0%). The overall surgical complication rate was 16.4%, with five pneumothorax, five port malfunctions, three haemorrhages, two infections, one thrombus, and one mediastinal injury. Each pneumothorax was associated with subclavian cannulation attempts. Two haemorrhages were associated with both open cephalic and subclavian attempts. Radiologists performed 248 ultrasound-guided internal jugular vein TIVAD insertions (n=248) with 247 successful first attempts (99.5%). Within the radiology group, there was an overall complication rate of 15.3% with 22 infections, 14 port malfunctions, one haemorrhage, and 1 mediastinal injury. Conclusion Ultrasound-guided internal jugular vein TIVAD insertion had the highest first attempt success rate in both the surgical and radiology groups.
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.