ArticleJapanese journal of radiology2025
Evaluation of a novel central venous access port for direct catheter insertion without a peel-away sheath.
Article in Japanese journal of radiology, 2025. 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.
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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis study retrospectively evaluated the feasibility and safety of implanting a newly developed central venous access port (CV-port) that allows catheter insertion into a vein without the use of a peel-away sheath, with a focus on its potential to minimize risks associated with conventional implantation methods. MATERIALS AND
methodsAll procedures were performed using a new device (P-U CelSite Port™ MS; Toray Medical, Tokyo, Japan) under ultrasound guidance. The primary endpoint was the implantation success rate. The secondary endpoints were the safety and risk factors for infection in the early postprocedural period (< 30 days).
resultsWe assessed 523 CV-port implantations performed in a cumulative total of 523 patients (240 men and 283 women; mean age, 61.6 ± 13.1 years; range, 18-85 years). All implantations were successfully performed using an inner guide tube and over-the-wire technique through 522 internal jugular veins and one subclavian vein. The mean procedural time was 33.2 ± 10.9 min (range 15-112 min). Air embolism, rupture/perforation of the superior vena cava, or hemothorax did not occur during catheter insertion. Eleven (2.1%) intraprocedural complications occurred, including Grade I arrhythmia (n = 8) and subcutaneous bleeding (n = 1), Grade II arrhythmia (n = 1), and Grade IIIa pneumothorax (n = 1). Furthermore, 496 patients were followed up for ≥ 30 days. Six early postprocedural complications were encountered (1.1%), including Grade IIIa infection (n = 4), catheter occlusion (n = 1), and skin necrosis due to subcutaneous leakage of trabectedin (n = 1). These six CV-ports were withdrawn, and no significant risk factors for infection in the early postprocedural period were identified.
conclusionThe implantation of this CV-port device demonstrated comparable success and complication rates to conventional devices, with the added potential benefit of eliminating complications associated with the use of a peel-away sheath.
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.