ReviewFrontiers in surgery2026
Is there a difference in catheter-related thrombosis between left- and right-sided arm ports and chest ports?
Review in Frontiers in surgery, 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Totally Implantable Venous Access Ports (TIVAPs) are long-term subcutaneous venous infusion devices widely used in patients requiring prolonged venous therapy, particularly those with cancer. The choice of left- vs. right-sided implantation during TIVAP implantation is a key clinical decision, as anatomical and hemodynamic differences between sides may influence the risk of catheter-related thrombosis (CRT). However, existing literature remains controversial regarding the association between implantation side and CRT incidence. This meta-analysis aims to systematically evaluate the impact of left- vs. right-sided TIVAP implantation on CRT risk, providing evidence-based support for clinical prevention strategies. Methods: Literature searches were conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (CBM), China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang Data, and VIP Database to identify studies investigating the effect of left- vs. right-sided TIVAP implantation on CRT incidence. The search spanned from database inception to October 2025. Two independent researchers screened literature, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias of the included studies. A meta-analysis was conducted using RevMan 5.3 software. Results: A total of 21 studies involving 10,778 patients were included. Meta-analysis revealed no statistically significant difference in CRT incidence between left- and right-sided chest ports [OR = 1.28, 95%CI (0.97-1.68), Conclusions: Current evidence indicates no overall difference in CRT incidence between left- and right-sided TIVAPs. However, the observed sample size-dependent association suggests that left-sided implantation may carry a slightly higher CRT risk in large cohorts. Clinicians may select the implantation side based on individual patient characteristics. However, large-sample, multi-center randomized controlled trials are needed to further validate these findings, particularly given the observed sample size-dependent differences.
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.