Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39283363›Full record

SynthesisSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2024

Central venous access device adverse events in pediatric patients with cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Jenna L Nunn, Mari D Takashima, Erin M Wray-Jones, Trisha A Soosay Raj, Diane M T Hanna, Amanda J Ullman

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Central venous access device-associated complication costs in paediatric cancer care.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Observational
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Core Tenets of Central Venous Access in Children.Seminars in interventional radiology · 2025
    Review
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

6 authors.

Jenna L NunnChildren's Health Queensland Hospital & Health Service, Brisbane, Australia. Jenna.nunn2@health.qld.gov.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7790-9955
Mari D TakashimaChildren's Health Queensland Hospital & Health Service, Brisbane, Australia.
Erin M Wray-JonesSunshine Coast University Hospital, Sunshine Coast, Australia.
Trisha A Soosay RajChildren's Health Queensland Hospital & Health Service, Brisbane, Australia.
Diane M T HannaThe University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.
Amanda J UllmanChildren's Health Queensland Hospital & Health Service, Brisbane, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo systematically review the proportion and incidence of CVAD-associated complications in pediatric patients with cancer.

methodsPubMed, Embase, and the Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature were searched from 2012 to 2022. Cohort studies and the control arm of randomized controlled trials, which reported CVAD-associated complications in pediatric patients aged 0-18 years, were included. CVAD complications were defined as CVAD failure, central line-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI), local infection, occlusion, CVAD-associated venous thromboembolism, dislodgement/migration, breakage/rupture, and dehiscence. The pooled proportion and incidence rate (IR) for each CVAD-associated complication were reported.

resultsOf 40 included studies, there was mixed quality of methods and reporting. Approximately 31.4% (95% confidence interval [CI] 22.5-41.1; 6920 devices) of devices experienced a CVAD-associated complication, and 14.8% (95% CI 10.2-20.1; 24 studies; 11,762 devices) of CVADs failed before treatment completion (incidence rate (IR) of 0.5 per 1000 catheter days (95% CI 0.3-0.8; 12 studies; 798,000 catheter days)). Overall, 21.2% (95% CI 14.3-28.9; 26 studies; 5054 devices) of CVADs developed a CLABSI, with an IR of 0.9 per 1000 catheter days (95% CI 0.6-1.3; 12 studies; 798,094 catheter days). Tunneled central venous catheters (TCVC) and peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) were associated with increased complications in comparison to totally implanted venous access devices (TIVADs).

conclusionCVAD complication rates in this population remain high. TCVCs and PICCs are associated with increased complications relative to TIVADs. Insufficient evidence exists to guide device selection in this cohort, necessitating further research to determine the role of PICCs in pediatric cancer care. PROSPERO: CRD42022359467. Date of registration: 22 September 2022.

Indexed as

Catheterization, Central VenousCentral Venous CathetersNeoplasmsAdolescentCatheter-Related InfectionsChildChild, PreschoolHumansIncidenceInfantInfant, NewbornRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicCentral cathetersComplicationsCVADOncologyPediatrics

Identifiers

PMID39283363
PMCPMC11405478

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.