Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35935884›Full record

ArticleAsia-Pacific journal of oncology nursing2022

Evidence on port-locking with heparin versus saline in patients with cancer not receiving chemotherapy: A randomized clinical trial.

Melania Cia-Arriaza, Sandra Cabrera-Jaime, Rosario Cano-Soria, Mireia Manzano-Castro, Margarita Domínguez-Gómez, Dolores M Prieto-Arenas, Angeles Benito-Yagüe, Adela Sánchez-Martín, Cristina González-Alonso, Paz Fernández-Ortega

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Asia-Pacific journal of oncology nursing, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 24% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. [Clinical Practice and Quality Control Guidelines for Totally Implantable Venous Access Ports in Cancer Patients (2024)].Sichuan da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Sichuan University. Medical science edition · 2025
    Guideline
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Melania Cia-ArriazaCatalan Institute of Oncology (ICO-Badalona), Hospital Germans Trias i Pujol, Badalona, Spain.
Sandra Cabrera-JaimeCatalan Institute of Oncology (ICO-Badalona), Hospital Germans Trias i Pujol, Badalona, Spain.
Rosario Cano-SoriaCatalan Institute of Oncology (ICO-Badalona), Hospital Germans Trias i Pujol, Badalona, Spain.
Mireia Manzano-CastroCatalan Institute of Oncology (ICO), Barcelona, Spain.
Margarita Domínguez-GómezCatalan Institute of Oncology (ICO), Barcelona, Spain.
Dolores M Prieto-ArenasCatalan Institute of Oncology (ICO), Barcelona, Spain.
Angeles Benito-YagüeCatalan Institute of Oncology (ICO), Barcelona, Spain.
Adela Sánchez-MartínCatalan Institute of Oncology (ICO), Barcelona, Spain.
Cristina González-AlonsoCatalan Institute of Oncology (ICO), Barcelona, Spain.
Paz Fernández-OrtegaGRIN Group, IDIBELL, Institute of Biomedical Research, Barcelona, Spain.
Institut Català d'Oncologia · ESInstitut Català d'Ornitologia · ESInstitut d'Investigacions Biomèdiques de Barcelona · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: To assess the safety and efficacy of port-locking with heparin every 2 months vs. every 4 months and vs. saline solution every 2 months in patients with cancer not receiving active chemotherapy. The hypothesis stated that locking with heparin at four-month intervals and saline at two-month intervals would not increment > 10% of port obstructions. Methods: Multicentre, phase IV parallel, post-test control group study took place at the two chemotherapy units of oncology hospitals. Included patients with cancer with ports that completed the chemotherapy treatment but still having port maintenance care or blood samples taken up to four months. A sample of 126 patients with cancer in three arms was needed to detect a maximum difference of 10% for bioequivalence on the locking methods. Consecutive cases non-probabilistic sampling and randomized to one of the three groups; group A: received heparin 60 IU/mL every two months (control) vs. group B heparin every four months and vs. saline every two months in group C. Primary variables were the type of locking regimen, port obstruction, and absence of blood return, port-related infection, or venous thrombosis during the study period. Clinical and sociodemographic variables were also collected. Results: A total of 143 patients were randomly assigned; group A, 47 patients with heparin every 2 months, group B, 51 patients with heparin 4 months, and group C, 45 patients with saline every 2 months. All participants presented an adequate blood return and no obstructions, until the month of the 10th, when one participant in the group A receiving was withdrawn due to an absence of blood flow ( Conclusions: Port locks with heparin every 4 months or saline every 2 months did not show differences in safety maintenance, infection, or thrombosis compared to heparin every 2 months.

Indexed as

Cancer patientCentral venous cathetersComplicationsHeparinNursing careObstructionPort

Identifiers

PMID35935884
PMCPMC9345785
OpenAlexW4281262984

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.