SynthesisFrontiers in oncology2025
Comparing internal jugular vein and subclavian vein for central venous insertion of implantable ports in cancer chemotherapy: a meta-analysis of RCTs.
Synthesis in Frontiers in oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Right-Sided Endocarditis in Children With Chemotherapy Port Migration: Clinical Challenges and Management Strategies.JACC. Case reports · 2026Article
- Comparative safety outcomes of three venous access routes for totally implantable venous access port placement and exploratory assessment of pre-removal catheter-related thrombosis in breast cancer patients.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Research progress and narrative review of totally implantable venous access ports.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Review
- Ultrasound-guided axillary vein versus internal jugular vein access for totally implantable venous access ports in breast cancer: a retrospective comparison of patient-reported outcomes.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Central venous access for cancer chemotherapy is crucial for patients undergoing long-term treatment. The internal jugular vein (IJV) and subclavian vein (SCV) are commonly used for implantable port insertion, though the optimal choice remains debated. This meta-analysis aims to compare the safety and effectiveness of IJV and SCV for central venous implantable port insertion in cancer chemotherapy patients based on randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Methods: We systematically reviewed RCTs comparing IJV and SCV for implantable port insertion. The primary endpoint was complication, while secondary endpoints included procedure failure rate, procedure duration, patient satisfaction, and pain perception. Results: A total of 7 studies based on 6 RCTs met the inclusion criteria. The baseline characteristics (age, sex, port side, and duration of implant) of patients in both groups were comparable. According to patient-reported outcomes, the SCV group experienced higher rates of total complications (risk ratio [RR]: 0.52 [0.29, 0.93], P = 0.03, Conclusions: For cancer chemotherapy patients, the IJV appears to be a safer and less painful alternative to the SCV for central venous port insertion. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier CRD42025641904.
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.