215 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 14675682)
1. Complications of indwelling venous access devices in patients with gynecologic malignancies.
Estes JM; Rocconi R; Straughn JM; Bhoola S; Leath CA; Alvarez RD; Kilgore LC; Huh WK
Gynecol Oncol; 2003 Dec; 91(3):591-5. PubMed ID: 14675682
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Complications of indwelling venous access devices in cancer patients.
Eastridge BJ; Lefor AT
J Clin Oncol; 1995 Jan; 13(1):233-8. PubMed ID: 7799025
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Complications related to indwelling caval catheters on a gynecologic oncology service.
Silver DF; Hempling RE; Recio FO; Piver MS; Eltabbakh GH
Gynecol Oncol; 1998 Sep; 70(3):329-33. PubMed ID: 9790783
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Externalized Groshong catheters and Hickman ports for central venous access in gynecologic oncology patients.
Gleeson NC; Fiorica JV; Mark JE; Pinelli DM; Hoffman MS; Roberts WS; Cavanagh D
Gynecol Oncol; 1993 Dec; 51(3):372-6. PubMed ID: 8112648
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Incidence of mechanical malfunction in low-profile subcutaneous implantable venous access devices in patients receiving chemotherapy for gynecologic malignancies.
Subramaniam A; Kim KH; Bryant SA; Kimball KJ; Huh WK; Straughn JM; Estes JM; Alvarez RD
Gynecol Oncol; 2011 Oct; 123(1):54-7. PubMed ID: 21742372
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Long-term, totally implantable central venous access ports connected to a Groshong catheter for chemotherapy of solid tumours: experience from 178 cases using a single type of device.
Biffi R; Corrado F; de Braud F; de Lucia F; Scarpa D; Testori A; Orsi F; Bellomi M; Mauri S; Aapro M; Andreoni B
Eur J Cancer; 1997 Jul; 33(8):1190-4. PubMed ID: 9301441
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Longterm central venous access in gynecologic cancer patients.
Minassian VA; Sood AK; Lowe P; Sorosky JI; Al-Jurf AS; Buller RE
J Am Coll Surg; 2000 Oct; 191(4):403-9. PubMed ID: 11030246
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. [Infectious and non-infectious complications of tunneled central catheters in hematologic patients].
Albo López C; López Rodríguez D; Constenla Camba MI; Jimenéz Blanco A; Araujo LF; García-Medina J
Sangre (Barc); 1999 Jun; 44(3):176-81. PubMed ID: 10481577
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Upper extremity deep vein thrombosis associated with indwelling peripheral venous catheters in gynecology oncology patients.
Schimp VL; Munkarah AR; Morris RT; Deppe G; Malone J
Gynecol Oncol; 2003 May; 89(2):301-5. PubMed ID: 12713995
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Infectious morbidity associated with long-term use of venous access devices in patients with cancer.
Groeger JS; Lucas AB; Thaler HT; Friedlander-Klar H; Brown AE; Kiehn TE; Armstrong D
Ann Intern Med; 1993 Dec; 119(12):1168-74. PubMed ID: 8239247
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. A comparison of infections and complications in central venous catheters in adults with solid tumours.
Coady K; Ali M; Sidloff D; Kenningham RR; Ahmed S
J Vasc Access; 2015; 16(1):38-41. PubMed ID: 25198809
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Experience with 100 consecutive central venous access arm ports placed by interventional radiologists.
Hills JR; Cardella JF; Cardella K; Waybill PN
J Vasc Interv Radiol; 1997; 8(6):983-9. PubMed ID: 9399467
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Experience with the intravenous totally implanted port in patients with gynecologic malignancies.
Nelson BE; Mayer AR; Tseng PC; Schwartz PE
Gynecol Oncol; 1994 Apr; 53(1):98-102. PubMed ID: 8175028
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Complications of radiologically placed central venous ports and Hickman catheters in patients with AIDS.
Muscedere G; Bennett JD; Lee TY; Mackie I; Vanderburgh L
Can Assoc Radiol J; 1998 Apr; 49(2):84-9. PubMed ID: 9561010
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Polyurethane versus silicone catheters for central venous port devices implanted at the forearm.
Wildgruber M; Lueg C; Borgmeyer S; Karimov I; Braun U; Kiechle M; Meier R; Koehler M; Ettl J; Berger H
Eur J Cancer; 2016 May; 59():113-124. PubMed ID: 27023050
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Totally implantable central venous access ports for long-term chemotherapy. A prospective study analyzing complications and costs of 333 devices with a minimum follow-up of 180 days.
Biffi R; de Braud F; Orsi F; Pozzi S; Mauri S; Goldhirsch A; Nolè F; Andreoni B
Ann Oncol; 1998 Jul; 9(7):767-73. PubMed ID: 9739444
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Peripheral venous access ports: outcomes analysis in 109 patients.
Bodner LJ; Nosher JL; Patel KM; Siegel RL; Biswal R; Gribbin CE; Tokarz R
Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol; 2000; 23(3):187-93. PubMed ID: 10821892
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Peripheral infusion ports for central venous access in patients with gynecologic malignancies.
Cunningham MJ; Collins MB; Kredentser DC; Malfetano JH
Gynecol Oncol; 1996 Mar; 60(3):397-9. PubMed ID: 8774645
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Long-term follow-up of upper extremity implanted venous access devices in oncology patients.
Lyon RD; Griggs KA; Johnson AM; Olsen JR
J Vasc Interv Radiol; 1999 Apr; 10(4):463-71. PubMed ID: 10229476
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. An evaluation of Groshong central venous catheters on a gynecologic oncology service.
Holloway RW; Orr JW
Gynecol Oncol; 1995 Feb; 56(2):211-7. PubMed ID: 7896188
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
