ArticleQuantitative imaging in medicine and surgery2026
High-pressure-resistant totally implantable venous power ports for improving image quality in contrast-enhanced computed tomography.
Article in Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT) is essential for cancer screening, staging, and surveillance, but achieving optimal image quality requires the administration of high-pressure contrast injection via a reliable venous access. Peripheral intravenous catheters (PIVC) have significant limitations in oncology settings, including pain, extravasation risk, and contrast pooling that degrades image quality. Totally implantable venous power ports (TIVPPs) offer a central venous route resistant to high-pressure injection, yet quantitative evidence of their impact on image quality metrics remains scarce. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of TIVPP-based contrast injection on image quality and safety in chest CECT for oncology patients. Methods: In this retrospective fixed-order sequential study, 195 oncology patients underwent two chest CECT scans at a tertiary medical center between August 1, 2022, and July 31, 2024. Each patient first received contrast injection via a PIVC and then via a TIVPP. Objective image parameters, including signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), and CT attenuation values, were measured. Subjective image quality scores, the presence of artifacts, and complication rates were compared. Statistical analyses were performed via paired t-tests and McNemar or Fisher exact tests. Results: The time interval between the PIVC and TIVPP examinations was 131.0±26.2 days (median 128 days; range 71-180 days). Contrast extravasation occurred in 3.1% of examinations performed with PIVCs but in none performed with TIVPPs (P=0.030). Compared to PIVCs, TIVPPs provided significantly higher aortic attenuation (405.50 Conclusions: TIVPPs provide a safe, reliable, and diagnostically superior route for high-pressure contrast injection in chest CECT for patients with cancer. They maintain significantly superior objective and subjective image quality compared to peripheral venous access, with no contrast extravasation. However, the fixed-order sequential design might have introduced temporal confounding, which should be considered in the interpretation of our findings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.