96 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21392913)
1. Clinical benefit of power-injectable port systems: a prospective observational study.
Teichgräber UK; Nagel SN; Kausche S; Enzweiler C
Eur J Radiol; 2012 Mar; 81(3):528-33. PubMed ID: 21392913
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. A comparison of clinical outcomes with regular- and low-profile totally implanted central venous port systems.
Teichgräber UK; Streitparth F; Cho CH; Benter T; Gebauer B
Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol; 2009 Sep; 32(5):975-9. PubMed ID: 19085032
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. [Experiences with power-injectable port systems: complications, patient satisfaction and clinical benefit].
Chang DH; Kabbasch C; Bovenschulte H; Libicher M; Maintz D; Bangard C
Rofo; 2013 May; 185(5):454-60. PubMed ID: 23616022
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. [Contrast media pressure injection using a portal catheter system--results of an in vitro study].
Gebauer B; Teichgräber UK; Hothan T; Felix R; Wagner HJ
Rofo; 2005 Oct; 177(10):1417-23. PubMed ID: 16170712
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Power injectable peripherally inserted central venous catheter lines frequently flip after power injection of contrast.
Lozano LA; Marn C; Goodman LR
J Comput Assist Tomogr; 2012; 36(4):427-30. PubMed ID: 22805672
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Radiologic placement of a low profile implantable venous access port in a pediatric population.
Nosher JL; Bodner LJ; Ettinger LJ; Siegel RL; Gribbin C; Asch J; Drachtman RA
Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol; 2001; 24(6):395-9. PubMed ID: 11907746
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Power-injectable ports: safety during placement, therapeutic use, and contrast administration during computed tomography procedures.
Alexander MD; Morrison HL
J Vasc Access; 2012; 13(4):432-7. PubMed ID: 22610789
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Safety and feasibility of using a central venous catheter for rapid contrast injection rates.
Sanelli PC; Deshmukh M; Ougorets I; Caiati R; Heier LA
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2004 Dec; 183(6):1829-34. PubMed ID: 15547237
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Central venous access ports placed by interventional radiologists: experience with 125 consecutive patients.
Lorch H; Zwaan M; Kagel C; Weiss HD
Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol; 2001; 24(3):180-4. PubMed ID: 11443406
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Peripherally placed totally implantable venous-access port systems of the forearm: clinical experience in 763 consecutive patients.
Goltz JP; Scholl A; Ritter CO; Wittenberg G; Hahn D; Kickuth R
Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol; 2010 Dec; 33(6):1159-67. PubMed ID: 20414657
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. The late complications of totally implantable central venous access ports: the results from an Italian multicenter prospective observation study.
Dal Molin A; Rasero L; Guerretta L; Perfetti E; Clerico M
Eur J Oncol Nurs; 2011 Dec; 15(5):377-81. PubMed ID: 21167777
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Follow-up of radiologically totally implanted central venous access ports of the upper arm: long-term complications in 127,750 catheter-days.
Busch JD; Herrmann J; Heller F; Derlin T; Koops A; Adam G; Habermann CR
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2012 Aug; 199(2):447-52. PubMed ID: 22826411
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Power injection of contrast media using central venous catheters: feasibility, safety, and efficacy.
Herts BR; O'Malley CM; Wirth SL; Lieber ML; Pohlman B
AJR Am J Roentgenol; 2001 Feb; 176(2):447-53. PubMed ID: 11159092
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Factors predicting subcutaneous implanted central venous port function: the relationship between catheter tip location and port failure in patients with gynecologic malignancies.
Cohn DE; Mutch DG; Rader JS; Farrell M; Awantang R; Herzog TJ
Gynecol Oncol; 2001 Dec; 83(3):533-6. PubMed ID: 11733967
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Double-lumen central venous port catheters: simultaneous application for chemotherapy and parenteral nutrition in cancer patients.
Teichgräber UK; Nagel SN; Kausche S; Streitparth F; Cho CH
J Vasc Access; 2010; 11(4):335-41. PubMed ID: 20954131
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. [First experiences with intravenous port systems authorized for high pressure injection of contrast agent in multiphasic computed tomography].
Wieners G; Redlich U; Dudeck O; Schütte K; Ricke J; Pech M
Rofo; 2009 Jul; 181(7):664-8. PubMed ID: 19517341
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Technical benefits and outcomes of modified upwardly created subcutaneous chest pockets for placing central venous ports: single-center experience.
Lee SH; Chun HJ; Choi BG
Acta Radiol; 2009 May; 50(4):368-73. PubMed ID: 19267272
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. High pressure versus standard port system: comparison of implantation and complications.
Plumhans C; Ocklenburg C; Verburg FA; Günther RW; Behrendt FF
J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol; 2012 Oct; 56(5):532-7. PubMed ID: 23043572
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. [The fluoroscopy-guided implantation of subcutaneous venous ports: the complications and long-term results].
Kluge A; Stroh H; Wagner D; Rauber K
Rofo; 1998 Jul; 169(1):63-7. PubMed ID: 9711285
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Feasibility of power contrast injections and bolus triggering during CT scans in oncologic patients with totally implantable venous access ports of the forearm.
Goltz JP; Machann W; Noack C; Hahn D; Kickuth R
Acta Radiol; 2011 Feb; 52(1):41-7. PubMed ID: 21498324
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
