A Method for Following Patients with Retrievable Inferior Vena Cava Filters: Results and Lessons Learned from the First 1,100 Patients

Lynch, Frank C.

doi:10.1016/j.jvir.2011.07.019

Cited by 49 publications

(68 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, they noted that the radiology-led approach improved follow-up and documentation, ensuring that a clinical decision was made about how long the IVC filter was required and whether retrieval should be attempted, thus ensuring that patients were not lost to follow-up [14]. Another group has demonstrated improved IVC filter removal rates employing a mailing system to contact patients when it is time to remove their filter [15].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

British Society of Interventional Radiology (BSIR) Inferior Vena Cava (IVC) Filter Registry

Uberoi

Tapping

Chalmers

et al. 2013

Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The British Society of Interventional Radiology (BSIR) Inferior Vena Cava (IVC) Filter Registry was produced to provide an audit of current United Kingdom (UK) practice regarding placement and retrieval of IVC filters to address concerns regarding their safety. Methods The IVC filter registry is a web-based registry, launched by the BSIR on behalf of its membership in October 2007. This report is based on prospectively collected data from October 2007 to March 2011. This report contains analysis of data on 1,434 IVC filter placements and 400 attempted retrievals performed at 68 UK centers. Data collected included patient demographics, insertion and retrieval data, and patient follow-up. Results IVC filter use in the majority of patients in the UK follows accepted CIRSE guidelines. Filter placement is usually a low-risk procedure, with a low major complication rate (\0.5 %). Cook Gunther Tulip (560 filters: 39 %) and Celect (359 filters: 25 %) filters constituted the majority of IVC filters inserted, with Bard G2, Recovery filters, Cordis Trapease, and OptEase constituting most of the remainder (445 filters: 31 %). More than 96 % of IVC filters deployed as intended. Operator inexperience (\25 procedure) was significantly associated with complications (p \ 0.001). Of the IVC filters initially intended for temporary placement, retrieval was attempted in 78 %. Of these retrieval was technically successful in 83 %. Successful retrieval was significantly reduced for implants left in situ for[9 weeks versus those with a shorter dwell time.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

British Society of Interventional Radiology (BSIR) Inferior Vena Cava (IVC) Filter Registry

Uberoi

Tapping

Chalmers

et al. 2013

Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Patient follow‐up is generally left to the referring or primary physician, with some studies showing improved retrieval if the responsibility of follow‐up is placed on the implanting physician instead 32, 33, 34. In institutions where the implanting physicians are made responsible for patient follow‐up, retrieval rates have increased from 24% to 59% and 29% to 60% 32, 33…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Vena Cava Filter Retrieval Rates and Factors Associated With Retrieval in a Large US Cohort

Brown

Raissi

Han

et al. 2017

JAHA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundRetrieval of vena cava filters (VCFs) is important for safety as complications increase with longer dwell times. This study assessed VCF retrieval rates and factors associated with retrieval in a national cohort.Methods and Results VCFs were identified by procedural codes from an administrative claims database. Patients were identified who had a VCF placement during a hospitalization from a national commercial administrative claims database. Indications for VCF placement were identified as pulmonary embolism with or without deep vein thrombosis, deep vein thrombosis only, or prophylactic. Patient demographic and clinical characteristics were included in proportional hazard regression models to find associations with early (90‐day) and 1‐year VCF retrieval. Initiation of anticoagulation and the correlation between time‐to‐retrieval and time‐to‐initiation of anticoagulation were observed. Of 54 766 patients receiving a VCF, 36.9% had pulmonary embolism, 43.9% had deep vein thrombosis only, and 19.2% had no apparent venous thromboembolism present. Over the 1 year of follow‐up, the cumulative incidence of VCF retrieval was 18.4%. Retrieval increased over time from a low of 14.0% in 2010 up to ≈24% in 2014. In adjusted time‐to‐event models, increasing age, differing regions, and some comorbidities were associated with poorer retrieval rates. Initiation of anticoagulation was poorly correlated with retrieval, with anticoagulation preceding retrieval by a median of 51 days while those without retrieval had a median of 278 days of exposure to anticoagulation.Conclusions VCF retrieval increased over the study period but remained suboptimal and was weakly correlated with anticoagulation initiation.

show abstract

“…[29][30][31][32][33] Patient follow-up is generally left to the referring or primary physician, with some studies showing improved retrieval if the responsibility of follow-up is placed on the implanting physician instead. [32][33][34] In institutions where the implanting physicians are made responsible for patient follow-up, retrieval rates have increased from 24% to 59% and 29% to 60%. 32,33 While there is inherent concern for patient safety associated with these low retrieval rates, clinical practices are also financially incentivized to increase retrieval of VCFs.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[32][33][34] In institutions where the implanting physicians are made responsible for patient follow-up, retrieval rates have increased from 24% to 59% and 29% to 60%. 32,33 While there is inherent concern for patient safety associated with these low retrieval rates, clinical practices are also financially incentivized to increase retrieval of VCFs. One study showed that because of the increased cost between DVT indicates deep vein thrombosis; VCF, vena cava filter; PE, pulmonary embolism; VTE, venous thromboembolism.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Vena Cava Filter Retrieval Rates and Factors Associated With Retrieval in a Large U.S Cohort

Brown¹,

Raissi²,

Han³

et al. 2018

Journal of Vascular Surgery: Venous and Lymphatic Disorders

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

A Method for Following Patients with Retrievable Inferior Vena Cava Filters: Results and Lessons Learned from the First 1,100 Patients

Cited by 49 publications

References 20 publications

British Society of Interventional Radiology (BSIR) Inferior Vena Cava (IVC) Filter Registry

British Society of Interventional Radiology (BSIR) Inferior Vena Cava (IVC) Filter Registry

Vena Cava Filter Retrieval Rates and Factors Associated With Retrieval in a Large US Cohort

Vena Cava Filter Retrieval Rates and Factors Associated With Retrieval in a Large U.S Cohort

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About