Objective To compare the comprehensive infusion effects of PICC and PORT by measuring the comprehensive effectiveness index for the two central venous catheters. Methods Tumor patients using PICC or PORT for medium and long-term intravenous infusion in a tertiary grade A hospital in Shanghai were selected.Relevant indicators reflecting the safety, efficacy and patient experience of the two intravenous infusion techniques were collected through a retrospective cohort study and a cross-sectional survey.The comprehensive effectiveness index was calculated to compare the effectiveness for PICC and PORT at the total dwelling time, 3~ months, 6~ months and 9~12 months, respectively. Results A total of 377 patients with PICC and 293 with PORT were included.The indwelling time of PICC was shorter than PORT, and the incidence of secondary complications during catheterization and maintenance for PICC was significantly higher than that of PORT.The quality of life for PICC was slightly lower than PORT （all P＜0.05）.The comprehensive effectiveness indexes of PICC were lower than those in the PORT at the total dwelling time, 3~ months, 6~ months and 9~12 months. Conclusion The comprehensive infusion effect of PORT is better than that of PICC.It is recommended to give preference to PORT as the vascular access for medium and long-term intravenous infusion from the point of effectiveness.