Complications associated with the use of vascular access ports in dogs receiving external beam radiation therapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess the perioperative and postoperative complications associated with use of vascular access ports (VAPs) in the jugular and lateral saphenous veins of dogs requiring frequent anesthetic episodes for radiation therapy. DESIGN: Cohort study. ANIMALS: 40 dogs referred to a veterinary teaching hospital. PROCEDURES: VAPs were used in 23 dogs, and intravenous catheters inserted in a peripheral vein were used in 17 dogs. The frequency of perioperative and postoperative complications associated with VAP use and the frequency of infection associated with intravenous catheter use were recorded. Results of bacterial culture of VAP tips and amount of time required for VAP placement and removal and for anesthetic induction were also recorded. RESULTS: VAP-associated perioperative complications included malposition of the catheter tip in 4 of 23 (17.4%) dogs. The VAP-associated postoperative complications included seroma formation in 7 (30.4%) dogs, breakage of port-anchoring sutures in 3 (13.0%) dogs, suspected fatal catheter-related septicemia in 1 (4.3%) dog, and temporary partial withdrawal occlusion in 18 of 255 (7.1%) anesthetic episodes. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Placement of VAPs provided ready access in dogs receiving radiation therapy. Most complications were minor and self-limiting; however, a low risk of serious complications existed. Use of fluoroscopy to assess position of the catheter tip is recommended to decrease the risk of malposition. Immediate removal of a VAP is recommended when clinical signs of infection develop. Removal of a VAP at the completion of radiation therapy should be performed unless the benefit of continued vascular access outweighs the risks.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".