Venous cutdown vs Seldinger technique: Infections
Venous cutdown showed no clear difference in infections compared with seldinger technique (moderate certainty).
What each review found
Current versions only| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Venous cutdown vs Seldinger technique Infections · patients requiring an elective TIVAP insertion for treatment of benign or malignant disease Venous cutdown showed no clear difference in infections compared with seldinger technique (moderate certainty). Venous cutdown versus the Seldinger technique for placement of totally implantable venous access ports (2016) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | OR 0.63 [0.25, 1.56] | 6 studies · 906 participants | Moderate |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Venous cutdown versus the Seldinger technique for placement of totally implantable venous access ports 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | Not reported | list not extracted yet | Not assessed |
Studies behind the findings
None of these reviews ties its included studies to this outcome in the data here. Cochrane reviews and reviews with headline outcomes only do not list their studies yet.
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.