Current Practice of Temporary Vena Cava Filter Insertion: A Multicenter Registry

Lorch, Heike; Welger, D; Wagner, Vicki P.; Hillner, Birgit; Strecker, E P; Herrmann, Howard C.; Voshage, Götz; Zur, C.; Schwarzbach, Christoph; Schroder, Jacob N.; Gullotta, U; Pleiβner, J.; Hüttner, S.; Siering, Ulrich; Märcklin, C.; Chavan, Ajay; Glaser, Felix; Apitzsch, D. E.; Moubayed, K.; Leonhardi, J.; Schuchard, U. M.; Weiss, H.-D.; Zwaan, M.

doi:10.1016/s1051-0443(07)61287-1

Cited by 151 publications

(94 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…An accepted fl uoroscopy time of 2.8 minutes and cumulative dose of 166 mGy have been published (7), compared with the 3.2 minutes and 79 mGy reported here. Th e adverse event rate (2%, or 6 of 299 procedures) reported herein is signifi cantly lower than that in older studies (20%) (8), likely due to equipment and procedural advancements. a Calculated from average reported procedure times multiplied by attending proceduralist salary, estimated from the hospital cost allocation system.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 69%

Factors Associated with Reduced Radiation Exposure, Cost, and Technical Difficulty of Inferior Vena Cava Filter Placement and Retrieval

Neill

Charles

Pflager

et al. 2017

Baylor University Medical Center Proceedings

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 69%

Factors Associated with Reduced Radiation Exposure, Cost, and Technical Difficulty of Inferior Vena Cava Filter Placement and Retrieval

Neill

Charles

Pflager

et al. 2017

Baylor University Medical Center Proceedings

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Additional therapy for such a thrombus may be required, such as anticoagulation medication and/or aspiration of the thrombus or additional IVCF placement. 9) In addition, placement of less than 2 weeks is generally recommended for a tIVCF filter, and a Toray Neuhaus Protect catheter, which was used as a tIVCF in this study, should also be removed within 2 weeks.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…7) However, the use of tIVCF for DVT patients remains controversial and available data from prospective, randomized controlled studies are limited to established strict indications for insertion of a tIVCF. 8,9) In this study, we reviewed the clinical course of patients in whom a tIVCF was inserted for DVT, and evaluated their prognosis and complications that arose during tIVCF placement.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Effect of a Temporary Inferior Vena Cava Filter in the Treatment of Deep Vein Thrombosis in Critically-Ill Patients

et al. 2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARYWe studied the clinical courses of patients with deep vein thrombus (DVT) who underwent insertion of temporary inferior vena cava filters (tIVCF) and evaluated the effectiveness of the tIVCF.From January 2003 to March 2008, tIVCF were placed in 12 patients with a diagnosis of DVT in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) of Gunma University Hospital. The mean age of the patients was 52 ± 16 years (range, 18-82). Eight were medical patients who had not undergone any prior surgery, and 4 were postoperative patients, including 3 with a malignancy. The diagnosis of DVT was made using enhanced computed tomography. The Toray Neuhaus Protect catheter (6Fr, Toray Medical, Tokyo) was used as a tIVCF in all 12 patients. We evaluated the clinical course of the patients before and after placement of a tIVCF and studied their prognosis.DVT occurred on 15 ± 9 days after surgery or admission to hospital. Pulmonary thromboembolism (PTE) was detected in 7 patients prior to the placement of a tIVCF, 3 of whom required cardiopulmonary resuscitation. The mean duration of tIVCF placement was 18 ± 9 days; no episodes of PTE occurred after tIVCF placement. DVT completely or almost completely disappeared during the period of tIVCF placement; subsequently, tIVCFs were successfully removed in 10 patients (83%). A permanent IVCF was placed in only 1 patient, and the tIVCF was removed in the remaining patient because of suspected catheter infection. There were 2 complications related to tIVCF placement: infection at the insertion site and suspected catheter infection. tIVCF placement could prevent the occurrence of PTE without provoking life-threatening complications. The results suggest that tIVCF is useful in the prevention of PTE in patients with DVT. (Int Heart J 2008; 49: 713-721)

show abstract

“…23,24) However, paralleling the increased use of temporary vena cava filters, complications have been described that were mainly associated with their structure, in that part of the device projects from the insertion site. [24][25][26] Some of these complications were serious, and included infection where the device protruded from the insertion site, 27) air embolism through a defective sheath, 24) worsening of proximal thrombosis along the attached catheter, 25) and migration of the filter into the pulmonary artery. 26) Moreover, temporary filters must be replaced by permanent filters 24) when the maximal implantation period is reached before successful completion of therapy for DVT.…”

Section: Type Of Filtersmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[24][25][26] Some of these complications were serious, and included infection where the device protruded from the insertion site, 27) air embolism through a defective sheath, 24) worsening of proximal thrombosis along the attached catheter, 25) and migration of the filter into the pulmonary artery. 26) Moreover, temporary filters must be replaced by permanent filters 24) when the maximal implantation period is reached before successful completion of therapy for DVT. Because of the abovementioned complications and problems with temporary vena cava filters, the use of an optional vena cava filter that could be implanted without an attached catheter or guide-wire would be advantageous.…”

Section: Type Of Filtersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prophylactic Implantation of Inferior Vena Cava Filter during Endovascular Therapies for Deep Venous Thrombosis of the Lower Extremities

Yamagami

2011

Annals of Vascular Diseases

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Patients with deep venous thrombosis (DVT) of the lower extremities have an increased risk of pulmonary emboli and post-thrombotic syndrome. Traditionally, they are treated medicinally, with anticoagulation therapy. Currently, endovascular therapies, with their higher efficiency, have replaced previously attempted systemic fibrinolytic therapies. There is a continuing controversy in the temporary use of filters in the inferior vena cava during these endovascular therapies, which may include catheter-directed thrombolysis, manual aspiration, mechanical thrombectomy, percutaneous transluminal angioplasty and placement of selfexpandable metallic stents. Here, we present an overview of the literature and analysis on the application of prophylactic implantation of an inferior vena cava filter during endovascular therapy for DVT of the lower extremities.

show abstract

Current Practice of Temporary Vena Cava Filter Insertion: A Multicenter Registry

Cited by 151 publications

References 15 publications

Factors Associated with Reduced Radiation Exposure, Cost, and Technical Difficulty of Inferior Vena Cava Filter Placement and Retrieval

Factors Associated with Reduced Radiation Exposure, Cost, and Technical Difficulty of Inferior Vena Cava Filter Placement and Retrieval

The Effect of a Temporary Inferior Vena Cava Filter in the Treatment of Deep Vein Thrombosis in Critically-Ill Patients

Prophylactic Implantation of Inferior Vena Cava Filter during Endovascular Therapies for Deep Venous Thrombosis of the Lower Extremities

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About