Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37213486›Full record

ArticleEJVES vascular forum2023

Cephalic Vein Cut Down for Total Implantable Venous Access Ports: A Retrospective Review of a Single Institution Series.

Ángel Barba Vélez

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in EJVES vascular forum, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Ángel Barba VélezDepartment of Angiology and Vascular Surgery, IMQ Zorrotzaurre University Hospital, Ballets Olaeta Kalea, 4, Bilbao, Spain.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: The aim of this work was to describe the early and late success rates of cephalic vein cut down (CVC) in the implantation of totally implantable venous access ports (TIVAP) for chemotherapy treatment in oncological patients. Methods: This was a retrospective study of 1 047 TIVAP performed in a private institution between 2008 and 2021. The CVC with pre-operative ultrasound (PUS) was the initial approach. All cephalic veins (CVs) were mapped pre-operatively with Doppler ultrasound, measuring their diameter and course in oncological patients who required a TIVAP. With a CV diameter ≥ 3.2 mm TIVAP was carried out by CVC; with CV diameter < 3.2 mm, subclavian vein puncture (SVP) was performed. Results: 1 047 TIVAPs were implanted in 998 patients. The mean age was 61.5 ± 11.5 years, 624 were women (65.5%). Male patients were significantly older and with a higher incidence of colonic, digestive system, and laryngeal cancer. Initially, TIVAP was indicated in 858 cases (82%) by CVC and 189 (18%) by SVP. The success rate was 98.5% for CVC and 98.4% for SVP. There were no complications for CVC (0%) but five early complications (2.5%) in the SVP group. The rates of late complications were 4.4% in the CVC group and 5.0% in the SVP group, foreign body infection being the most frequent (57.5% of the cases) ( Conclusion: The CVC or SVP using PUS for TIVAP deployment, performed through a single incision, is a safe and effective technique. This open but minimally invasive technique should be considered in oncological patients.

Indexed as

Cephalic Vein Cut downComplicationsPre-operative ultrasoundSuccess rateTotally implantable venous access ports

Identifiers

PMID37213486
PMCPMC10196808

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.