ArticleIndian journal of surgical oncology2025
Indian Expert Consensus on the Selection of Vascular Access Devices in Oncology Patients.
Article in Indian journal of surgical oncology, 2025. 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.
- Post-Treatment Trajectories of Retained Totally Implantable Venous Access Ports After Anticancer Therapy: A Conditional Landmark Cohort Study.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To develop consensus recommendations for the selection and management of vascular access devices (VADs) in oncology patients in India by addressing unique challenges in the Indian healthcare ecosystem. An expert panel of 11 specialists in oncology and interventional radiology convened to review literature and develop consensus statements on 10 key questions related to the selection of VAD in cancer patients. The panel used a nominal group technique during a face-to-face meeting, achieving 100% consensus on all statements through structured discussions. The panel deliberated and agreed upon 10 consensus statements, addressing the indications for central venous access devices (CVADs), available CVAD options, clinical decision-making processes for identifying appropriate CVADs for different groups of patient, decision-makers for device selection and insertion, factors influencing port selection, the logistical requirements and CVAD maintenance protocols in cancer patients in India. Key recommendations emphasize the use of CVADs for administering vesicant drugs, considering both external catheters and implantable ports based on the duration and frequency of treatment. The recommendations also highlight the importance of involving multidisciplinary teams in device selection and implementing standardized training and protocols for insertion and maintenance. These consensus recommendations provide guidance on VAD selection and management tailored to the Indian oncology setting. The statements emphasize the importance of patient-centred decision-making, proper training for healthcare providers, and the need for increased awareness and education to enhance the appropriate adoption of implantable ports in India. Implementation of these recommendations may improve vascular access care and outcomes for cancer patients across diverse healthcare environments in India.
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.