ReviewBMC surgery2025
Venous Port implantation in persistent left superior vena cava with azygos vein variation: a case report and literature review.
Review in BMC surgery, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPersistent left superior vena cava catheterization for venous port is still sporadically reported, let alone combined with variations of the azygos. CASE PRESENTATION: During the implantation of a venous access port in a 73-year-old patient, who was planned to carry out postoperative chemotherapy, a persistent left superior vena cava was discovered. A review of the preoperative plain chest computed tomography further corroborated the existence of a double superior vena cavas. Besides, the right azygos vein was absent and a left azygos vein draining into the persistent left superior vena cava was evident. The diameter of the persistent left superior vena cava was greater than that of the right SVC. Consequently, the decision was made to insert the catheter into the persistent left superior vena cava for the subsequent implantation procedures. The surgery was successful and no complications related to the venous port occurred during the whole catheter days.
conclusionsThe rare persistent left superior vena cava with variant azygos vein should not be a contraindication for venous port implantation after a comprehensive evaluation.
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.