159 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 19787834)
1. Analysis of risk factors for central venous port failure in cancer patients.
Hsieh CC; Weng HH; Huang WS; Wang WK; Kao CL; Lu MS; Wang CS
World J Gastroenterol; 2009 Oct; 15(37):4709-14. PubMed ID: 19787834
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Comparisons of outcomes and survivals for two central venous access port systems.
Hou SM; Wang PC; Sung YC; Lee HH; Liu HT; Chen YH
J Surg Oncol; 2005 Jul; 91(1):61-6. PubMed ID: 15999349
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. A randomized, prospective trial of central venous ports connected to standard open-ended or Groshong catheters in adult oncology patients.
Biffi R; De Braud F; Orsi F; Pozzi S; Arnaldi P; Goldhirsch A; Rotmensz N; Robertson C; Bellomi M; Andreoni B
Cancer; 2001 Sep; 92(5):1204-12. PubMed ID: 11571734
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Clinical impact of peripherally inserted central catheters vs implanted port catheters in patients with cancer: an open-label, randomised, two-centre trial.
Taxbro K; Hammarskjöld F; Thelin B; Lewin F; Hagman H; Hanberger H; Berg S
Br J Anaesth; 2019 Jun; 122(6):734-741. PubMed ID: 31005243
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. 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]
6. Risk of thrombosis and infections of central venous catheters and totally implanted access ports in patients treated for cancer.
Beckers MM; Ruven HJ; Seldenrijk CA; Prins MH; Biesma DH
Thromb Res; 2010 Apr; 125(4):318-21. PubMed ID: 19640573
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Randomized Clinical Trial Evaluating Complications and Complication-Related Removal of Arm-Situated Power-Injectable and Non-Power-Injectable Totally Implanted Venous Access Devices among Cancer Patients.
Burbridge B; Plewes C; Stoneham G; Szkup P; Otani R; Babyn P; Bryce R
J Vasc Interv Radiol; 2018 May; 29(5):648-656.e3. PubMed ID: 29499999
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Totally implantable venous access devices: evaluation of complications and a prospective comparative study of two different port systems.
Hartkamp A; van Boxtel AJ; Zonnenberg BA; Witteveen PO
Neth J Med; 2000 Dec; 57(6):215-23. PubMed ID: 11099790
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Does systemic antibiotic prophylaxis prior to the placement of totally implantable venous access devices reduce early infection? A retrospective study of 1,485 cases at a large academic institution.
Choksi A; Finnegan K; Etezadi V
Am J Infect Control; 2020 Jan; 48(1):95-99. PubMed ID: 31439370
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Risk Factors for Early Port Infections in Adult Oncologic Patients.
Skummer P; Kobayashi K; DeRaddo JS; Blackburn T; Schoeneck M; Patel J; Jawed M
J Vasc Interv Radiol; 2020 Sep; 31(9):1427-1436. PubMed ID: 32792279
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Retrospective evaluation of totally implantable venous access port devices: early and late complications.
Gurkan S; Seber S; Gur O; Yetisyigit T; Okan Donbaloglu M; Ozkaramanli Gur D
J BUON; 2015; 20(1):338-45. PubMed ID: 25778336
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Long-term outcomes of totally implantable venous access devices.
Wang YC; Lin PL; Chou WH; Lin CP; Huang CH
Support Care Cancer; 2017 Jul; 25(7):2049-2054. PubMed ID: 28181014
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Quality-of-life assessment: arm TIVAD versus chest TIVAD.
Burbridge B; Goyal K
J Vasc Access; 2016 Nov; 17(6):527-534. PubMed ID: 27768211
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Feasibility and safety of endovascular stripping of totally implantable venous access devices.
Heye S; Maleux G; Goossens GA; Vaninbroukx J; Jerôme M; Stas M
Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol; 2012 Jun; 35(3):607-12. PubMed ID: 21479744
[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. Effect of catheter diameter on left innominate vein in breast cancer patients after totally implantable venous access port placement.
Song MG; Seo TS; Kim YH; Cho SB; Chung HH; Lee SH; Jung E
J Vasc Access; 2018 Nov; 19(6):615-619. PubMed ID: 29560786
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. 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]
18. A comparative study between two central veins for the introduction of totally implantable venous access devices in 1201 cancer patients.
Araújo C; Silva JP; Antunes P; Fernandes JM; Dias C; Pereira H; Dias T; Fougo JL
Eur J Surg Oncol; 2008 Feb; 34(2):222-6. PubMed ID: 17566692
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. 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]
20. Assessing the time-to-removal of totally implantable venous access devices comparing valved-versus open-ended catheters in patients treated with chemotherapy.
Amroun K; Brugel M; Rhaiem R; Teuma L; Vannieuwenhuyse G; Lipere A; Brenet E; Kianmanesh R; Bouché O
J Vasc Access; 2024 Jan; ():11297298231223539. PubMed ID: 38205615
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
