Skip to main content
. 2016 Aug 21;2016(8):CD008942. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD008942.pub2

Comparison 5. Catheter/port‐related complications.

Outcome or subgroup title No. of studies No. of participants Statistical method Effect size
1 Seldinger (subclavian & IJ) versus venous cutdown (cephalic vein) ITT 7 1006 Odds Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI) 1.00 [0.61, 1.64]
2 Seldinger (subclavian vein) versus venous cutdown (cephalic vein) ITT 5 672 Odds Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI) 6.77 [2.31, 19.79]
3 Seldinger (IJ vein) versus venous cutdown (cephalic vein) ITT 2 367 Odds Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI) 0.81 [0.43, 1.52]
4 Seldinger (subclavian & IJ) versus venous cutdown (cephalic vein). On‐treatment analysis 7 938 Odds Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI) 0.93 [0.57, 1.53]
5 Seldinger (subclavian vein) versus venous cutdown (cephalic vein). On‐treatment analysis 5 618 Odds Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI) 6.62 [2.24, 19.58]
6 Seldinger (IJ vein) versus venous cutdown (cephalic vein). On‐treatment analysis 2 332 Odds Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI) 0.75 [0.40, 1.43]