Temporary vena cava filters and ultrahigh streptokinase thrombolysis therapy: a clinical study

Guidelines for Perioperative Care in Bariatric Surgery: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Society Recommendations

BACKGROUND

During the last two decades, an increasing number of bariatric surgical procedures have been performed worldwide. There is no consensus regarding optimal perioperative care in bariatric surgery. This review aims to present such a consensus and to provide graded recommendations for elements in an evidence-based "enhanced" perioperative protocol.

METHODS

The English-language literature between January 1966 and January 2015 was searched, with particular attention paid to meta-analyses, randomised controlled trials and large prospective cohort studies. Selected studies were examined, reviewed and graded. After critical appraisal of these studies, the group of authors reached a consensus recommendation.

RESULTS

Although for some elements, recommendations are extrapolated from non-bariatric settings (mainly colorectal), most recommendations are based on good-quality trials or meta-analyses of good-quality trials.

CONCLUSIONS

A comprehensive evidence-based consensus was reached and is presented in this review by the enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) Society. The guidelines were endorsed by the International Association for Surgical Metabolism and Nutrition (IASMEN) and based on the evidence available in the literature for each of the elements of the multimodal perioperative care pathway for patients undergoing bariatric surgery.

Vena Caval Filters: A Review for Intensive Care Specialists

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common complication among patients in the intensive care unit. While anticoagulation remains standard therapy, vena caval filters are an important alternative when anticoagulation is contraindicated. To determine the safety and efficacy of vena caval filters in the treatment of VTE, a comprehensive review of the English-language medical literature was performed. Except for one randomized controlled trial, the literature supporting the use of vena caval filters consists almost exclusively of case series, which in many instances are limited by incomplete and short follow-up. While case series suggest that filters function effectively in the prevention of pulmonary embolism (2%-4% symptomatic pulmonary embolism [PE], fatal PE < 2%), recent higher quality studies indicate that filters may not provide significant additional protection to that provided by anticoagulation alone. Furthermore, filters are associated with a 2- fold increase in the incidence of recurrent DVT. Until randomized comparative studies are available, the safety and efficacy of all the available devices should be considered to be roughly equivalent. Since filters do not inhibit continued clot formation, all filter patients should receive anticoagulation for durations appropriate for their thrombotic disorder. Although extended anticoagulation may prevent thrombotic complications associated with filter placement, this strategy has yet to be experimentally tested. While many additional indications for vena caval filter use have been proposed (VTE in cancer patients, PE prophylaxis in trauma patients, etc), well-designed clinical trials demonstrating their efficacy in these situations are lacking. Further development of temporary/retrievable filters, which offer the potential to avoid the long-term complications of permanent filters, should be a research priority. Until additional data are available, vena caval filters should generally be restricted to patients with VTE who cannot receive anticoagulation.

Inferior vena cava filters

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) remains a common disease with significant clinical impact upon our patients. Diagnostic challenges occur because of the nonspecific nature of the presenting symptoms. The advent of multidetector computed tomography, methods to stratify patients into VTE risks (low, intermediate, high) along with serological assays (D-dimers), have helped direct patients through proper workup and into conclusive diagnosis. In most cases, standard medical therapy for VTE is anticoagulation therapy (OAT). In situations where standard OAT is either contraindicated or complications result from that therapy, insertion of inferior vena cava (IVC) filters is considered. Recent reports suggest that although IVC filters are able to prevent pulmonary emboli (PE) in the short and intermediate term, there appear to be long-term consequences including excess recurrent deep venous thombosis (DVT and IVC/filter occlusions). Recognition of the time sequence of IVC filter benefits and complications has encouraged development of optional IVC filters, which can be left in place indefinitely or removed usually before certain time constraints. This article will attempt to address the timing of IVC filter placements to protect patients from significant PE.

Catheter-Directed Thrombolysis of Acute Deep Vein Thrombosis in the Lower Extremity of a Child with Interrupted Inferior Vena Cava

We present the case of a 14-year-old girl who developed acute deep vein thrombosis (DVT) in her right lower extremity. Laboratory testing revealed protein S deficiency, and the patient's father also had this abnormality with a history of lower extremity DVT. Manual thromboaspiration followed by catheter-directed thrombolysis resulted in total clearance of all thrombi. Computed tomography and later venography revealed an interrupted inferior vena cava. Catheter-directed thrombolysis is an established treatment for adults with acute DVT. To the best of our knowledge, this report is the first to describe catheter-directed thrombolysis in a pediatric patient with lower extremity DVT. Our results suggest that catheter-directed thrombolysis is safe and effective for use in selected older children and adolescents with acute DVT in the lower extremity.

Long-duration temporary vena cava filter: A prospective 104-case multicenter study

BACKGROUND

Nonpermanent caval filters are placed in critical thromboembolic situations in which anticoagulation therapy is transiently contraindicated, ineffective, or the source of complications. The purpose of this study was to assess the safety and effectiveness of a second-generation long-duration temporary caval filter in these situations and compare its utility with that of other temporary filters.

METHODS

This prospective study, including patients who underwent temporary caval filtration with the Tempofilter II, was conducted in nine European centers. All filters were successfully implanted. The filter was removed when the indication for caval filtration ceased.

RESULTS

A total of 104 filters were inserted in 103 patients with an average age of 60 +/- 15.5 years (range, 22-92 years). Most patients (85%) had pulmonary embolism, deep venous thrombosis, or both. The main indications for caval filter placement were complications of or contraindications to anticoagulation therapy (n = 85; 82.5%) or for ineffectiveness of anticoagulation therapy (n = 12; 11.7%). The average duration of implantation was 29.5 +/- 14.0 days (range, 2-86 days). One filter migrated in the right atrium, followed by pulmonary embolism. No other case of pulmonary embolism or of infectious or mechanical complications related to the filter was observed. Thrombus was trapped within the filter in 24 cases (23.3%). All filters but one were removed, regardless of whether thrombus had been trapped. Retrieval was always successful after implantation periods up to 12 weeks. In 16 cases (15.5%), the filter was replaced by a permanent filter.

CONCLUSIONS

The Tempofilter II is safe, effective, and useful in critical thromboembolic situations. It offers a valuable alternative to retrievable optional filters.

Optional Inferior Vena Cava Filter Retrieval with Retained Thrombus: An in Vitro Model

PURPOSE

Retrieval of an optional inferior vena cava (IVC) filter with retained thrombus may result in pulmonary emboli if the trapped thrombus is not removed along with the filter. An in vitro model was developed to determine the fate of trapped thrombus during filter removal.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An in vitro IVC flow model was created with 25-mm inner diameter tubing and a 50% glycerol/water solution. Three different optional filters-Recovery (Bard, Tempe, AZ), Günther-Tulip (Cook Inc., Bloomington IN), and OptEase (Cordis Endovascular/Johnson & Johnson, Warren, NJ)-were evaluated in the study. A known mass of mature thrombus (porcine, aged 1 wk) was trapped within the optional filters. The filters were then retrieved according to the manufacturers' protocol, and the mass of thrombus recovered with the filter was determined. For each filter, five iterations were performed with initial thrombus sizes less than 1 g (group A) and an additional five iterations with initial thrombus sizes greater than 1 g (group B).

RESULTS

Thrombi from group A were statistically significantly smaller than those from group B (P < .0001). Retrieval of the Recovery filter resulted in an average of 25% (range, 0%-53%) and 4% (range, 0%-7%) of the clot being removed in group A and group B, respectively. Retrieval of the Günther-Tulip filter resulted in an average of 22% (group A) and 13% (group B) of the clot being removed. Retrieval of the OptEase filter resulted in an average of 43% (group A) and 0% (group B) of the clot being removed.

CONCLUSIONS

In our in vitro model, we have established that the mass of thrombus retrieved with optional filters is only a fraction of the initial clot burden. Because of the risk of pulmonary emboli, care should be taken when IVC filters with large amounts of trapped thrombus are removed from patients.

Surgical Thrombectomy Followed by Intraoperative Endovascular Reconstruction for Symptomatic Ilio-femoral Venous Thrombosis

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy of surgical thrombectomy combined with endovascular reconstruction for acute ilio-femoral/caval venous thrombosis.

METHODS

Twenty consecutive patients with acute, symptomatic ilio-femoral/-caval thrombosis underwent valve-preserving thrombectomy with immediate endovascular repair between October 1996 and October 2003. Thrombectomy was classified by intraoperative venography as: TYPE I=complete, TYPE II=partial, TYPE III=complete with stenosis other than thrombus, TYPE IV=permanent occlusion. TYPEs I and IV were excluded from this analysis because endovascular repair was not performed.

RESULTS

Left-sided venous thrombosis predominated (90%). Lesions were located in the common iliac vein (85%), the external iliac vein (10%), and the inferior vena cava (5%). Three TYPE II lesions and 17 TYPE III lesions (11 spurs, one hypoplasia, one fibrosis, one haematoma, and three others) were diagnosed. Catheter-directed recanalisation (thrombectomy/thrombolysis) resolved TYPE II lesions in three patients. Balloon angioplasty (one patient), iliac stenting (15 patients [two with thrombolysis]), and caval stenting (one patient) were employed in TYPE III stenoses. No serious complication or death occurred. Mean follow-up was 21 months. Of 20 patients clinical results were excellent in 18 patients who maintained patency of their reconstructed iliac veins. Primary and secondary patency rates were 80 and 90%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Ilio-caval venous obstructions detected intraoperatively can be reconstructed in a one-stage combined procedure. The specific endovascular approach depends on the type of residual venous obstruction. Excellent mid-term results indicate that the proposed thrombectomy classification (TYPE I-IV) and treatment algorithm optimises the results in selected patients with symptomatic venous thrombosis.

Outcome and complications of retrievable inferior vena cava filters

The results and risks of retrievable inferior vena cava filters were reviewed. Systematic review identified 6 prospective case series with broad ranges of indications for filters. In these case series, 4 different types of retrievable filters were inserted in 284 patients. The longest reported duration of insertion was 134 days. Among patients in whom percutaneous removal of the filter was attempted, the filter was successfully removed in 144 of 159 (91%). Surgery was necessary to remove the filter from 1 patient (1%), and filters could not be removed because of large trapped thrombi in 14 patients (9%).