These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
276 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 34297997)
1. Central venous access devices for the delivery of systemic anticancer therapy (CAVA): a randomised controlled trial. Moss JG; Wu O; Bodenham AR; Agarwal R; Menne TF; Jones BL; Heggie R; Hill S; Dixon-Hughes J; Soulis E; Germeni E; Dillon S; McCartney E; Lancet; 2021 Jul; 398(10298):403-415. PubMed ID: 34297997 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Venous access devices for the delivery of long-term chemotherapy: the CAVA three-arm RCT. Wu O; McCartney E; Heggie R; Germeni E; Paul J; Soulis E; Dillon S; Ryan C; Sim M; Dixon-Hughes J; Agarwal R; Bodenham A; Menne T; Jones B; Moss J Health Technol Assess; 2021 Jul; 25(47):1-126. PubMed ID: 34318743 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. 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]
4. Comparison of peripherally inserted central venous catheters (PICC) versus subcutaneously implanted port-chamber catheters by complication and cost for patients receiving chemotherapy for non-haematological malignancies. Patel GS; Jain K; Kumar R; Strickland AH; Pellegrini L; Slavotinek J; Eaton M; McLeay W; Price T; Ly M; Ullah S; Koczwara B; Kichenadasse G; Karapetis CS Support Care Cancer; 2014 Jan; 22(1):121-8. PubMed ID: 24005884 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Patient acceptability of three different central venous access devices for the delivery of systemic anticancer therapy: a qualitative study. Ryan C; Hesselgreaves H; Wu O; Moss J; Paul J; Dixon-Hughes J; Germeni E BMJ Open; 2019 Jul; 9(7):e026077. PubMed ID: 31292176 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Peripherally inserted central catheter versus totally implanted venous port for delivering medium- to long-term chemotherapy: A cost-effectiveness analysis based on propensity score matching. Wang K; Zhou Y; Huang N; Lu Z; Zhang X J Vasc Access; 2022 May; 23(3):365-374. PubMed ID: 33579176 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. 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]
8. Complication rates of peripherally inserted central catheters vs implanted ports in patients receiving systemic anticancer therapy: A retrospective cohort study. Rieger MJ; Schenkel X; Dedic I; Brunn T; Gnannt R; Hofmann M; de Rougemont O; Stolz SM; Rösler W; Studt JD; Balabanov S; Wicki A; Lorch A; Manz MG; Schwotzer R Int J Cancer; 2023 Oct; 153(7):1397-1405. PubMed ID: 37254629 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Cost analysis comparison between peripherally inserted central catheters and implanted chest ports in patients with cancer-A health economic evaluation of the PICCPORT trial. Taxbro K; Hammarskjöld F; Juhlin D; Hagman H; Bernfort L; Berg S Acta Anaesthesiol Scand; 2020 Mar; 64(3):385-393. PubMed ID: 31721153 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Infectious complications in home parenteral nutrition: A long-term study with peripherally inserted central catheters, tunneled catheters, and ports. Santacruz E; Mateo-Lobo R; Riveiro J; Nattero L; Vega-Piñero B; Lomba G; Sabido R; Carabaña F; Arrieta FJ; Botella-Carretero JI Nutrition; 2019 Feb; 58():89-93. PubMed ID: 30391696 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Peripherally InSerted CEntral catheter dressing and securement in patients with cancer: the PISCES trial. Protocol for a 2x2 factorial, superiority randomised controlled trial. Rickard CM; Marsh NM; Webster J; Gavin NC; Chan RJ; McCarthy AL; Mollee P; Ullman AJ; Kleidon T; Chopra V; Zhang L; McGrail MR; Larsen E; Choudhury MA; Keogh S; Alexandrou E; McMillan DJ; Mervin MC; Paterson DL; Cooke M; Ray-Barruel G; Castillo MI; Hallahan A; Corley A; Geoffrey Playford E BMJ Open; 2017 Jun; 7(6):e015291. PubMed ID: 28619777 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Comparative Complication Rates of 854 Central Venous Access Devices for Home Parenteral Nutrition in Cancer Patients: A Prospective Study of Over 169,000 Catheter-Days. Cotogni P; Mussa B; Degiorgis C; De Francesco A; Pittiruti M JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr; 2021 May; 45(4):768-776. PubMed ID: 32511768 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Economic evaluation of peripherally inserted central catheter and other venous access devices: A scoping review. Wang K; Zhong J; Huang N; Zhou Y J Vasc Access; 2020 Nov; 21(6):826-837. PubMed ID: 31894710 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Role of peripherally inserted central catheters in home parenteral nutrition: a 5-year prospective study. Botella-Carretero JI; Carrero C; Guerra E; Valbuena B; Arrieta F; Calañas A; Zamarrón I; Balsa JA; Vázquez C JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr; 2013 Jul; 37(4):544-9. PubMed ID: 22898795 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Cost-utility analysis of centrally inserted totally implanted access port (PORT) vs. peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) in the oncology chemotherapy. Shao G; Zhou X; Zhang S; Wu S; Dong Y; Dong Z Front Public Health; 2022; 10():942175. PubMed ID: 35937250 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Central venous Access device SeCurement And Dressing Effectiveness for peripherally inserted central catheters in adult acute hospital patients (CASCADE): a pilot randomised controlled trial. Chan RJ; Northfield S; Larsen E; Mihala G; Ullman A; Hancock P; Marsh N; Gavin N; Wyld D; Allworth A; Russell E; Choudhury MA; Flynn J; Rickard CM Trials; 2017 Oct; 18(1):458. PubMed ID: 28978332 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Environmental Risk Factors for Developing Catheter-Related Bloodstream Infection in Home Parenteral Nutrition Patients: A 6-Year Follow-up Study. Bech LF; Drustrup L; Nygaard L; Skallerup A; Christensen LD; Vinter-Jensen L; Rasmussen HH; Holst M JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr; 2016 Sep; 40(7):989-94. PubMed ID: 25852128 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Comparison of outcomes of central venous catheters in patients with solid and hematologic neoplasms: an Italian real-world analysis. Corti F; Brambilla M; Manglaviti S; Di Vico L; Pisanu MN; Facchinetti C; Dotti KF; Lanocita R; Marchianò A; de Braud F; Ferrari LAM Tumori; 2021 Feb; 107(1):17-25. PubMed ID: 32529962 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Utilization and Complications of Central Venous Access Devices in Oncology Patients. Akhtar N; Lee L Curr Oncol; 2021 Jan; 28(1):367-377. PubMed ID: 33435136 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Risk of VTE associated with PORTs and PICCs in cancer patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Wang P; Soh KL; Ying Y; Liu Y; Huang X; Huang J Thromb Res; 2022 May; 213():34-42. PubMed ID: 35279504 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]