Di CarloI., PulvirentiE., ManninoM., ToroA.Increased use of percutaneous technique for totally implantable venous access devices. Is it real progress? A 27-year comprehensive review on early complications.Ann Surg Oncol2010; 17: 1649–56.
2.
NocitoA., WildiS., RufibachK.Randomized clinical trial comparing venous cutdown with the Seldinger technique for placement of implantable venous access ports.Br J Surg2009; 96: 1129–34.
3.
KnebelP., Lopez-BenitezR., FischerL.Insertion of totally implantable venous access devices: an expertise-based, randomized, controlled trial (NCT00600444).Ann Surg2011; 253: 1111–7.
4.
D'AngeloF.A., RamacciatoG., AurelloP.Prospective randomised study of cephalic vein cut-down versus subclavian vein puncture technique in the implantation of subcutaneous venous access devices.Chir Ital2002; 54: 495–500.
5.
BiffiR., OrsiF., PozziS.Best choice of central venous insertion site for the prevention of catheter-related complications in adult patients who need cancer therapy: a randomized trial.Ann Oncol2009; 20: 935–40.
6.
SarzoG., FincoC., PariseP.Insertion of prolonged venous access device: a comparison between surgical cutdown and percutaneous techniques.Chir Ital2004; 56: 437–42.
7.
SchummerW., SchummerC., RoseN.Mechanical complications and malpositions of central venous cannulations by experienced operators. A prospective study of 1794 catheterizations in critically ill patients.Intensive Care Med2007; 33: 1055–9.
