ArticleScientific reports2025
Impact of subcutaneous tunnel length on infection risk in tunneled PICCs: a study in cancer patient.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- A bibliometric review of peripherally inserted central catheters: Knowledge domain mapping and research trends.Medicine · 2026Review
- Dislodgement Rates of Tunneled Femoral Peripherally Inserted Central Catheters in Pediatric Oncology Patients.Journal of infusion nursing : the official publication of the Infusion Nurses SocietyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Tunneled peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) are crucial for delivering long-term intravenous therapies to cancer patients. We compared PICC-related complications among different patient groups and identify potential factors contributing to these complications. A total of 402 cancer patients who received tunneled PICC placement in our hospital were enrolled in this study. We then compared their general data, PICC-related characteristics, pain score and anxiety score, and PICC-related complications. Extravasation length were varied significantly between groups, with the highest length observed in Group A4. Analysis of catheter type showed a predominance of 4Fr and 4 F catheters. Needle size and catheter material used also differed significantly between groups. High-pressure single-lumen catheters were the most common. In addition, pain and anxiety scores were significantly different between the groups, with the A3 group scoring the highest in both areas. There were significant differences between the groups in PICC-related complications, particularly "Difficulty in Removal", which was significantly higher in the A4 group (7.2%). Attention to differences in gender distribution, BMI, PICC-related characteristics, and pain and anxiety scores in cancer patients in the clinical setting is important in developing an individualized approach to PICC placement.
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.