2009
DOI: 10.1378/chest.136.4_meetingabstracts.144s
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Outcome With Retrievable Inferior Vena Cava Filters

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

1
14
0

Year Published

2011
2011
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(15 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
1
14
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In our study, 22% of filters were placed for prophylactic reasons, which may reflect increased awareness of the availability of filters and increased interest in preventive measures to improve the outcome of stroke patients. Similarly, a trend towards new retrievable filters is also observed in other studies 24. The role of retrievable filters in stroke patients is not known.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 63%
“…In our study, 22% of filters were placed for prophylactic reasons, which may reflect increased awareness of the availability of filters and increased interest in preventive measures to improve the outcome of stroke patients. Similarly, a trend towards new retrievable filters is also observed in other studies 24. The role of retrievable filters in stroke patients is not known.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 63%
“…29 Placement of foreign bodies such as IVC filters ( Figures 6 and 7) or venous catheters may promote thrombus formation. [30][31][32] Occlusion of IVC filters remains their most frequent complication, with IVC thrombosis reported in 2.7% of patients owing to new local thrombus formation/ thrombogenicity of the device, trapped embolus from a more distant site, or cephalad extension of distal DVT. [31][32][33] Current underestimation of IVC thrombosis following filter insertion is suggested by the PREPIC study, which quotes rates from 13% at 8 years' follow-up, with 30% demonstrated in longer-term studies.…”
Section: Acquired Ivc Thrombosismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[30][31][32] Occlusion of IVC filters remains their most frequent complication, with IVC thrombosis reported in 2.7% of patients owing to new local thrombus formation/ thrombogenicity of the device, trapped embolus from a more distant site, or cephalad extension of distal DVT. [31][32][33] Current underestimation of IVC thrombosis following filter insertion is suggested by the PREPIC study, which quotes rates from 13% at 8 years' follow-up, with 30% demonstrated in longer-term studies. [34][35][36][37][38] IVC thrombosis secondary to abdominal trauma may result from endothelial injury secondary to compression or shearing forces, direct IVC vessel wall damage because of blunt or penetrating injury, indirect trauma leading to vessel bruising and tearing from spinal fractures or from extrinsic compression from adjacent haematoma formation.…”
Section: Acquired Ivc Thrombosismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…3 Previously reported non-bleeding complications associated with IVC filters include IVC thrombosis, new DVT, new pulmonary embolism (PE) and filter migration. 4,5 The British Society of Interventional Radiology (BSIR) recently evaluated placement and retrieval of 1434 IVC filters and reported that ....................................................................................................................... 88 patients demonstrated new lower limb DVT and/or IVC thrombosis following IVC filter placement. 6 At the present time, there is no reported consensus to establish routine surveillance guidelines of IVC filters; however, there are guidelines encouraging IVC device retrievals when the duration of treatment for a DVT/PE has been met or when the risk of a PE is no longer high, and/or the contraindication for anticoagulation is no longer a consideration.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%