The Role for Prophylaxis Inferior Vena Cava Filters in Patients Undergoing Bariatric Surgery: Replacing Anecdote with Evidence

2012 ◽  
Vol 78 (12) ◽  
pp. 1349-1361 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ben Shamian ◽  
Ronald S. Chamberlain
Keyword(s):  
Bariatric Surgery ◽  
Inferior Vena Cava ◽  
Inferior Vena ◽  
Vena Cava ◽  
Early Mobilization ◽  
Vein Thrombosis ◽  
Ivc Filters ◽  
Vena Cava Filters ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
Bariatric Patients

The number of patients choosing surgical alternatives for weight reduction continues to increase. Despite common thromboembolic preventive methods, which include perioperative subcutaneous heparin injections, early mobilization, and sequential compression devices, postoperative deep vein thrombosis/pulmonary embolism remains a devastating complication after bariatric surgery. The role prophylactic inferior vena cava (IVC) filters may play in bariatric surgery remains controversial, and this article aims to address the risks and benefits of prophylactic IVC filters in high-risk bariatric patients and suggest an evidence-based algorithm for their use.

Towards the Optimal Placement of Inferior Vena Cava Filters: Modeling the Impact of Renal Inflow

2009 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael A. Singer ◽  
William D. Henshaw ◽  
Stephen L. Wang
Keyword(s):  
Pulmonary Embolism ◽  
Inferior Vena Cava ◽  
Inferior Vena ◽  
Vena Cava ◽  
Optimal Placement ◽  
Trauma Patients ◽  
Vein Thrombosis ◽  
Ivc Filters ◽  
Vena Cava Filters ◽  
The Impact

The endovascular deployment of inferior vena cava (IVC) filters is a clinical treatment for the prevention of pulmonary embolism due to deep vein thrombosis. In addition, IVC filters are used routinely for prophylactic purposes in patients who are at high risk of developing pulmonary embolism, e.g., trauma patients. There are approximately eight IVC filters available in the U.S., each with a unique design.

Retroperitoneal Laparoscopic-Assisted Retrieval of Wall-Penetrating Inferior Vena Cava Filter After Endovascular Techniques Failed: An Initial Clinical Outcome

2021 ◽  
pp. 153857442110225
Author(s):  
Haidong Wang ◽  
Zhenhua Liu ◽  
Xiaofei Zhu ◽  
Jianlong Liu ◽  
Libo Man
Keyword(s):  
Deep Vein Thrombosis ◽  
Inferior Vena Cava ◽  
Inferior Vena ◽  
Vena Cava ◽  
Ivc Filter ◽  
Endovascular Techniques ◽  
Vein Thrombosis ◽  
Ivc Filters ◽  
Laparoscopic Assisted ◽  
Deep Vein

Background: Inferior vena cava (IVC) filters are commonly used in China to prevent pulmonary embolisms in patients with deep vein thrombosis. However, IVC filter removal is complicated when the filter has penetrated the IVC wall and endovascular techniques usually fail. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of retroperitoneal laparoscopic-assisted retrieval of wall-penetrating IVC filters after endovascular techniques have failed. Patients and Methods: We retrospectively evaluated a series of 8 patients who underwent retroperitoneal laparoscopic-assisted retrieval of a wall-penetrating IVC filter between December 2017 and November 2019. All patients had experienced at least 1 failure with endovascular retrieval before the study. The filters were slanted and the proximal retrieval hooks penetrated the posterior lateral IVC wall in all patients on computed tomography. Demographic information, operation parameters, and complications were recorded and analyzed. All patients were followed up for at least 12 months. Results: The procedure was successful in all patients. The median surgery time was 53.6 ± 12.7 min and the average blood loss was 45.0 ± 13.5 ml. No serious complication occurred during the patients’ hospitalization, which was an average of 6.4 days. The median follow-up time was 15.1 months, and no patient had deep vein thrombosis recurrence. Conclusions: Retroperitoneal laparoscopic-assisted retrieval is a feasible and effective technique, particularly when proximal retrieval hooks penetrate the posterior lateral wall of the IVC after endovascular techniques have failed. To some extent, the development of this technique at our institution has increased the success rate of filter removal and improved patient satisfaction.

scholarly journals Optimal Time of Extraction Retrievable Inferior Vena Cava Filters in Venous Thromboembolic Treatment: Evidence Based Case Report

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 41-47
Author(s):  
Akhmadu Muradi ◽  
Rudi Hermansyah
Keyword(s):  
Inferior Vena Cava ◽  
Dwell Time ◽  
Inferior Vena ◽  
Vena Cava ◽  
Optimal Time ◽  
Standard Time ◽  
Ivc Filters ◽  
Vena Cava Filters ◽  
Adjacent Structures ◽  
Successful Retrieval

Background: Inferior vena cava (IVC) filters have been proven to be significantly advantageous and clinically efficacious in the prevention of deathly venous thromboembolism, but also carry long-term risks, such as device failure, filter fracture, migration, penetration into adjacent structures, etc. Retrievable filters offer the same degree of protection, and subsequently lower those risk by removing them after they aren’t needed. Unfortunately, increasing use of retrievable filters leads to one alarming trend: there’s massive number of filters that are left for an extended time. Whether the time between deployment and retrieval affects filter’s technical success of retrieval remains questionable. Here is a case of a 45-year old woman who had undergone retrievable IVC filter due to pulmonary embolism risk. The patient only came to clinician for routine follow- up once, one month after deployment. One year later, the patient felt abdominal pain and asked to remove the filter. After one failed attempt, the clinician decided to leave the filter in situ as permanent filter. Method: Literature searching was conducted in several databases (ScienceDirect, EbscoHost, and ClinicalKey) using specified keywords. Six articles that had been passed exclusion and inclusion criteria, were eventually appraised and extracted. Results: Of all six articles that are included in this study, there are no standard time of retrieval. Each study provides data regarding their attempted retrieval, successful retrieval, and dwell time. Only two articles (Uberoi et al and Glocker et al) analyze the relationship between time of retrieval and successful retrieval. Uberoi et al claims filter retrieval statistically more successful if the dwell time is less than 9 weeks, whereas Glocker et al states the procedure is considerably more successful within 3-4 months (117 days) after deployment. The reasons of retrieval failure in these studies are varied, including device angulation, filter incorporation with IVC wall, and penetration to IVC wall and adjacent structures, or significant thrombus inside the filter. Conclusion: There are no standard time of retrieval, but clinicians could follow FDA recommendation by removing the filter when it isn’t necessarily needed. However, a time span of 3-4 months between implantation and retrieval can be respectable choice to make sure the maximum chance at retrieval success.

scholarly journals Safety and Outcomes of Permanent and Retrievable Inferior Vena Cava Filters in the Oncology Population

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 ◽  
pp. 1-7
Author(s):  
Saba S. Shaikh ◽  
Suneel D. Kamath ◽  
Debashis Ghosh ◽  
Robert J. Lewandowski ◽  
Brandon J. McMahon
Keyword(s):  
Inferior Vena Cava ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Inferior Vena ◽  
Vena Cava ◽  
Absolute Contraindication ◽  
Filter Placement ◽  
Ivc Filters ◽  
Vena Cava Filters ◽  
Recurrent Vte ◽  
Clinically Significant

Background. The role for inferior vena cava (IVC) filters in the oncology population is poorly defined. Objectives. Our primary endpoint was to determine the rate of filter placement in cancer patients without an absolute contraindication to anticoagulation and the rate of recurrent VTE after filter placement in both retrievable and permanent filter groups. Patients/Methods. A single-institution, retrospective study of patients with active malignancies and acute VTE who received a retrievable or permanent IVC filter between 2009-2013. Demographics and outcomes were confirmed on independent chart review. Cost data were obtained using Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes. Results. 179 patients with retrievable filters and 207 patients with permanent filters were included. Contraindication to anticoagulation was the most cited reason for filter placement; however, only 76% of patients with retrievable filters and 69% of patients with permanent filters had an absolute contraindication to anticoagulation. 20% of patients with retrievable filters and 24% of patients with permanent filters had recurrent VTE. The median time from filter placement to death was 8.9 and 3.2 months in the retrievable and permanent filter groups, respectively. The total cost of retrievable filters and permanent filters was $2,883,389 and $3,722,688, respectively. Conclusions. The role for IVC filters in cancer patients remains unclear as recurrent VTE is common and time from filter placement to death is short. Filter placement is costly and has a clinically significant complication rate, especially for retrievable filters. More data from prospective, randomized trials are needed to determine the utility of IVC filters in cancer patients.

Inferior Vena Cava Filters in the Cancer Patient: Current Use and Indications

2006 ◽  
Vol 4 (9) ◽  
pp. 881-888 ◽  
Author(s):  
Todd M. Getzen ◽  
John E. Rectenwald
Keyword(s):  
Inferior Vena Cava ◽  
Health Risks ◽  
Inferior Vena ◽  
Anticoagulation Therapy ◽  
Vena Cava ◽  
Chronically Ill ◽  
Inferior Vena Cava Filters ◽  
Ivc Filters ◽  
Vena Cava Filters ◽  
Significant Health

Deep venous thrombosis and thromboembolism are significant health risks, with high rates of morbidity and mortality. Chronically ill and hospitalized patients, particularly those with cancer, have a high risk for developing these conditions. Mechanical inferior vena cava (IVC) filtration has been standard care for patients with these conditions in whom anticoagulation therapy is contraindicated or has failed. This article reviews caval filters and the current indications for using mechanical IVC filters, including retrievable versus permanent filters, focusing on their use in treating venous thromboembolism in cancer patients.

Prophylactic Inferior Vena Cava Filters Prior to Bariatric Surgery

2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (12) ◽  
pp. 1153-1160 ◽  
Author(s):  
Satyajit Reddy ◽  
Chad J. Zack ◽  
Vladimir Lakhter ◽  
Vikas Aggarwal ◽  
Henry A. Pitt ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bariatric Surgery ◽  
Inferior Vena Cava ◽  
Inferior Vena ◽  
Vena Cava ◽  
Inferior Vena Cava Filters ◽  
Vena Cava Filters

Treatment: catheter-based intervention and inferior vena cava filters

ESC CardioMed ◽  
2018 ◽  
pp. 2781-2786
Author(s):  
Ronald S. Winokur ◽  
Akhilesh K. Sista
Keyword(s):  
Pulmonary Embolism ◽  
Deep Vein Thrombosis ◽  
Inferior Vena Cava ◽  
Inferior Vena ◽  
Vena Cava ◽  
Vein Thrombosis ◽  
Inferior Vena Cava Filters ◽  
Vena Cava Filters ◽  
Physiological Benefits ◽  
Deep Vein

Venous thromboembolism including pulmonary embolism and deep vein thrombosis leads to short- and long-term morbidity and in some cases mortality. Although treatment approaches vary among institutions based on local expertise, the employment of interventional techniques is of great interest. Several studies have shown clinical and physiological benefits from catheter-based techniques. However, these therapies are not without risk, especially with the use of powerful thrombolytic agents that increase the rate of bleeding. This chapter reviews the catheter-based techniques for the management of deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism as well as the indications and complications of inferior vena cava filters.

scholarly journals Inferior Vena Cava Filter in Childhood Septic Deep Vein Thrombosis

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Salim Aljabari ◽  
Shahzad Waheed ◽  
Ryan Davis ◽  
Amruta Padhye
Keyword(s):  
Inferior Vena Cava ◽  
Inferior Vena Cava Filter ◽  
Pediatric Patients ◽  
Inferior Vena ◽  
Vena Cava ◽  
Ivc Filter ◽  
Safety And Efficacy ◽  
Vein Thrombosis ◽  
Ivc Filters ◽  
Deep Vein

AbstractInferior vena cava (IVC) filter in venous thromboembolism (VTE) is an alternative to anticoagulation when the latter is contraindicated. The use of IVC filter in pediatrics continues to be rare and has not increased despite the ever-increasing rates of childhood VTE. Historically, septic VTE was regarded as a contraindication to IVC filter. Safety and efficacy of IVC filters in septic VTE have been reported in adult patients but not in pediatric patients. In this study, we reported a safe use of IVC filter in a critically ill 12-year-old patient with a large IVC thrombus and multiple pulmonary embolisms with favorable outcome.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document