SynthesisCardiovascular and interventional radiology2026
Tunneled Peripherally Inserted Central Catheters and Bloodstream Infection: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Cardiovascular and interventional radiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Risk factors for catheter-related infections in neck tumor patients undergoing chemotherapy through peripherally inserted central catheters.American journal of translational research · 2026Article
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
purposeWe aimed to determine whether central line-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) rates differ between tunneled and conventionally inserted PICCs (tPICCs and cPICCs). MATERIALS AND
methodsThis systematic review and meta-analysis was prospectively registered in PROSPERO (CRD42024616470) and reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were comprehensively searched from inception to November 27, 2024, to identify randomized controlled trials that compared CLABSI rates between tPICCs and cPICCs. Risk ratios along with the 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for outcomes using a random-effects meta-analysis model following the Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman method. Statistical heterogeneity was assessed using the I
resultsA meta-analysis of four relevant studies, comprising 2,659 participants (pooled mean age ± standard deviation, 59.3 ± 15.5 years; 1,481 women) and 177,879 catheter days, revealed overall CLABSI rates of 0.31 per 1,000 catheter-days in the tPICC group and 0.68 per 1,000 catheter-days in the cPICC group. The risk ratio (0.48; 95% CI, 0.28-0.81; p = 0.02) indicated a 52% reduction in the tPICC group compared with the cPICC group, with low heterogeneity (I
conclusionSubcutaneous tunneling for PICC placement is associated with a significant reduction in CLABSI rate among hospitalized adult patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41331124What 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.