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.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Journal Abstract Search

248 related items for PubMed ID: 11733967

  • 1. 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
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 2. An 11-year retrospective study of totally implanted central venous access ports: complications and patient satisfaction.
    Ignatov A, Hoffman O, Smith B, Fahlke J, Peters B, Bischoff J, Costa SD.
    Eur J Surg Oncol; 2009 Mar; 35(3):241-6. PubMed ID: 18329836
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 3. 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
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 4. Subcutaneously implanted central venous access devices in cancer patients: a prospective analysis.
    Schwarz RE, Groeger JS, Coit DG.
    Cancer; 1997 Apr 15; 79(8):1635-40. PubMed ID: 9118051
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 5. Experience with the intravenous totally implanted port in patients with gynecologic malignancies.
    Nelson BE, Mayer AR, Tseng PC, Schwartz PE.
    Gynecol Oncol; 1994 Apr 15; 53(1):98-102. PubMed ID: 8175028
    [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 Apr 15; 24(6):395-9. PubMed ID: 11907746
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 7. A peripherally implanted permanent central venous access device.
    Morris P, Buller R, Kendall S, Anderson B.
    Obstet Gynecol; 1991 Dec 15; 78(6):1138-42. PubMed ID: 1945224
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 8. Long-term experience with a totally implanted catheter system in gynecologic oncologic patients.
    Koonings PP, Given FT.
    J Am Coll Surg; 1994 Feb 15; 178(2):164-6. PubMed ID: 8173727
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 9. Relationship between chest port catheter tip position and port malfunction after interventional radiologic placement.
    Schutz JC, Patel AA, Clark TW, Solomon JA, Freiman DB, Tuite CM, Mondschein JI, Soulen MC, Shlansky-Goldberg RD, Stavropoulos SW, Kwak A, Chittams JL, Trerotola SO.
    J Vasc Interv Radiol; 2004 Jun 15; 15(6):581-7. PubMed ID: 15178718
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 10. 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 15; 50(4):368-73. PubMed ID: 19267272
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 11. [Implantable catheter systems. Experiences with 1000 patients with central venous ports].
    Kock HJ, Krause U, Pietsch M, Rasfeld S, Walz MK.
    Dtsch Med Wochenschr; 1996 Jan 19; 121(3):47-51. PubMed ID: 8565809
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 12. 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 19; 51(3):372-6. PubMed ID: 8112648
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 13. Risk of venous access device wound complications in patients undergoing paclitaxel chemotherapy for gynecologic malignancies.
    Boulay RM, Olt GJ, Podczaski ES.
    Gynecol Oncol; 1998 Aug 19; 70(2):259-62. PubMed ID: 9740701
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 14. Implantable subcutaneous venous access devices: is port fixation necessary? A review of 534 cases.
    McNulty NJ, Perrich KD, Silas AM, Linville RM, Forauer AR.
    Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol; 2010 Aug 19; 33(4):751-5. PubMed ID: 19957181
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 15. [Safety and effectiveness of central vein catheters indwelling with subcutaneous port in patients undergoing chemotherapy].
    Ge F, Cang J, Xue ZG.
    Zhonghua Yi Xue Za Zhi; 2008 Aug 26; 88(33):2331-4. PubMed ID: 19087693
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 16. 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 26; 52(1):69-73. PubMed ID: 8307504
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 17. Do central venous catheters have advantages over arteriovenous fistulas or grafts?
    Quarello F, Forneris G, Borca M, Pozzato M.
    J Nephrol; 2006 Jan 26; 19(3):265-79. PubMed ID: 16874685
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 18. 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 26; 32(5):975-9. PubMed ID: 19085032
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 19. Aspects of central venous access catheter usage in patients with malignancy.
    Hardman D, Englund R, Hanel K.
    N Z Med J; 1994 Jun 08; 107(979):224-6. PubMed ID: 8208484
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 20. Evaluation of catheter loops in central venous port systems.
    Behrendt FF, Wingen M, Katoh M, Guenther RW, Buecker A.
    Invest Radiol; 2006 Nov 08; 41(11):777-80. PubMed ID: 17035867
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Next] [New Search]
    of 13.