ArticlePloS one2023
Infectious complications of radiologically placed upper arm ports: A single center analysis.
Article in PloS one, 2023. 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Research progress and narrative review of totally implantable venous access ports.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesInfections are common complications in venous access ports. The presented analysis aimed to investigate the incidence, microbiological spectrum, and acquired resistances of pathogens in upper arm port associated infections to provide a decision aid in the choice of therapy. MATERIALS AND
methodsIn total, 2667 implantations and 608 explantations were performed at a high-volume tertiary medical center between 2015 and 2019. In cases with infectious complications (n = 131, 4.9%), procedural conditions and results of microbiological testing were reviewed retrospectively.
resultsOf 131 port associated infections (median dwell time 103 days, interquartile range 41-260), 49 (37.4%) were port pocket infections (PPI) and 82 (62.6%) were catheter infections (CI). Infectious complications occurred more often after implantation in inpatients compared to outpatients (P < 0.01). PPI were mainly caused by Staphylococcus aureus (S. aureus, 48.3%) and coagulase-negative staphylococci (CoNS, 31.0%). Other gram-positive and gram-negative species were encountered in 13.8% and 6.9%, respectively. CI were caused less frequently by S. aureus (8.6%) than CoNS (39.7%). Other gram-positive and gram-negative strains were isolated in 8.6% and 31.0%, respectively. Candida species were seen in 12.1% of CI. An acquired antibiotic resistance was detected in 36.0% of all significant isolates, occurring especially in CoNS (68.3%) and gram-negative species (24.0%).
conclusionsStaphylococci comprised the largest group of pathogens in upper arm port associated infections. However, gram-negative strains and Candida species should also be considered as a cause of infection in CI. Due to the frequent detection of potential biofilm-forming pathogens, port explantation is an important therapeutic measure, especially in severely ill patients. Acquired resistances must be anticipated when choosing an empiric antibiotic treatment.
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.