416 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11941896)
1. Cephalic vein cutdown for inserting indwelling subclavian vein catheters in gynecologic oncology patients.
Kamat A; Kramer P; Soisson AP
W V Med J; 2002; 98(1):15-7. PubMed ID: 11941896
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Insertion of Groshong central venous catheters utilizing fluoroscopic techniques.
Burnett AF; Lossef SV; Barth KH; Grendys EC; Johnson JC; Barter JF; Barnes WA
Gynecol Oncol; 1994 Jan; 52(1):69-73. PubMed ID: 8307504
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Experience of anesthesiologists with percutaneous nonangiographic venous access.
Chen PT; Sung CS; Wang CC; Chan KH; Chang WK; Hsu WH
J Clin Anesth; 2007 Dec; 19(8):609-15. PubMed ID: 18083475
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. External jugular vein cutdown approach, as a useful alternative, supports the choice of the cephalic vein for totally implantable access device placement.
Di Carlo I; Barbagallo F; Toro A; Sofia M; Lombardo R; Cordio S
Ann Surg Oncol; 2005 Jul; 12(7):570-3. PubMed ID: 15889215
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Guidewire assisted cephalic vein cutdown for insertion of totally implantable access ports.
Chang HM; Hsieh HF; Hsu SD; Liao GS; Lin CH; Hsieh CB; Yu JC
J Surg Oncol; 2007 Feb; 95(2):156-7. PubMed ID: 17262733
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Avoiding complications of long-term venous access.
Henriques HF; Karmy-Jones R; Knoll SM; Copes WS; Giordano JM
Am Surg; 1993 Sep; 59(9):555-8. PubMed ID: 8368659
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Venous cutdown versus the Seldinger technique for placement of totally implantable venous access ports.
Hsu CC; Kwan GN; Evans-Barns H; Rophael JA; van Driel ML
Cochrane Database Syst Rev; 2016 Aug; 2016(8):CD008942. PubMed ID: 27544827
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Prospective randomised study of cephalic vein cut-down versus subclavian vein puncture. Technique in the implantation of subcutaneous venous access devices.
D'Angelo FA
Chir Ital; 2003; 55(2):313. PubMed ID: 12744114
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Open insertion of right atrial catheters through the jugular veins.
Raaf JH; Heil D
Surg Gynecol Obstet; 1993 Sep; 177(3):295-8. PubMed ID: 8395086
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. A prospective analysis of the cephalic vein cutdown approach for chronic indwelling central venous access in 100 consecutive cancer patients.
Povoski SP
Ann Surg Oncol; 2000 Aug; 7(7):496-502. PubMed ID: 10947017
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Direct cephalic vein cannulation for safe subclavian access.
Perry EP; Nash JR; Klidjian AM
J R Coll Surg Edinb; 1990 Aug; 35(4):218-20. PubMed ID: 2121966
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Prospective randomized trial comparing implantation of subcutaneous indwelling venous access devices by the cephalic vein cutdown (CVC) approach versus the percutaneous subclavian vein (PSV) approach.
Povoski SP; Young DC
Chir Ital; 2003; 55(1):149-50. PubMed ID: 12633056
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Long-term central venous catheters: size and location do matter.
Onders RP; Shenk RR; Stellato TA
Am J Surg; 2006 Mar; 191(3):396-9. PubMed ID: 16490554
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Systematic review and meta-analysis of percutaneous subclavian vein puncture versus surgical venous cutdown for the insertion of a totally implantable venous access device.
Orci LA; Meier RP; Morel P; Staszewicz W; Toso C
Br J Surg; 2014 Jan; 101(2):8-16. PubMed ID: 24276950
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Insertion of prolonged venous access device: a comparison between surgical cutdown and percutaneous techniques.
Sarzo G; Finco C; Parise P; Savastano S; Vecchiato M; Degregori S; Merigliano S
Chir Ital; 2004; 56(3):437-42. PubMed ID: 15287644
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. [Totally implantable venous access ports by cephalic vein cut-down for patients receiving chemotherapy].
Ayadi S; Ksantini R; Maghrebi H; Daghfous A; Ayadi M; Fteriche F; Bedioui H; Chebbi F; Amous A; Jouini M; Kacem M; Mezlini A; Ben Safta Z
Tunis Med; 2011; 89(8-9):699-702. PubMed ID: 21948685
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. [Totally implantable venous access systems. Analysis of complications].
D'Angelo F; Ramacciato G; Caramitti A; Aurello P; Lauro S; Bordin F; Della Casa U
Minerva Chir; 1997; 52(7-8):937-42. PubMed ID: 9411296
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. An alternative technique for totally implantable central venous access devices. A retrospective study of 1311 cases.
Chang HM; Hsieh CB; Hsieh HF; Chen TW; Chen CJ; Chan DC; Yu JC; Liu YC; Shen KL
Eur J Surg Oncol; 2006 Feb; 32(1):90-3. PubMed ID: 16289481
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Cephalic vein cut-down verses percutaneous access: a retrospective study of complications of implantable venous access devices.
Jablon LK; Ugolini KR; Nahmias NC
Am J Surg; 2006 Jul; 192(1):63-7. PubMed ID: 16769277
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Prospective randomised study of cephalic vein cut-down versus subclavian vein puncture technique in the implantation of subcutaneous venous access devices.
D'Angelo FA; Ramacciato G; Aurello P; De Angelis R; Amodio P; Magrì M; Barillari P
Chir Ital; 2002; 54(4):495-500. PubMed ID: 12239758
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
