Current practice of temporary vena cava filter insertion: a multicenter registry

Developmental or Procedural Vena Cava Interruption and Venous Thromboembolism: A Review

The inferior vena cava (IVC) and superior vena cava are the main conduits of the systemic venous circulation into the right atrium. Developmental or procedural interruptions of vena cava might predispose to stasis and deep vein thrombosis (DVT) distal to the anomaly and may impact the subsequent rate of pulmonary embolism (PE). This study aimed to review the various etiologies of developmental or procedural vena cava interruption and their impact on venous thromboembolism. A systematic search was performed in PubMed according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines per each clinical question. For management questions with no high-quality evidence and no mutual agreements between authors, Delphi methods were used. IVC agenesis is the most common form of congenital vena cava interruption, is associated with an increased risk of DVT, and should be suspected in young patients with unexpected extensive bilateral DVT. Surgical techniques for vena cava interruption (ligation, clipping, and plication) to prevent PE have been largely abandoned due to short-term procedural risks and long-term complications, although survivors of prior procedures are occasionally encountered. Vena cava filters are now the most commonly used method of procedural interruption, frequently placed in the infrarenal IVC. The most agreed-upon indication for vena cava filters is for patients with acute venous thromboembolism and coexisting contraindications to anticoagulation. Familiarity with different forms of vena cava interruption and their local and systemic adverse effects is important to minimize complications and thrombotic events.

Perioperative management of acetabular and pelvic fractures: evidence-based recommendations

PURPOSE

The American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons does not currently provide clinical practice guidelines for management of PAF. Accordingly, this article aims to review and consolidate the relevant historical and recent literature in important topics pertaining to perioperative management of PAF.

METHODS

A thorough literature review using PubMed, Cochrane and Embase databases was performed to assess preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative management of PAF fracture. Topics reviewed included: time from injury to definitive fixation, the role of inferior vena cava filters (IVCF), tranexamic acid (TXA) use, intraopoperative cell salvage, incisional negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT), intraoperative antibiotic powder use, heterotopic ossification prophylaxis, and pre- and postoperative venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis.

RESULTS

A total of 126 articles pertaining to the preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative management of PAF were reviewed. Articles reviewed by topic include 13 articles pertaining to time to fixation, 23 on IVCF use, 14 on VTE prophylaxis, 20 on TXA use, 10 on cell salvage, 10 on iNPWT 14 on intraoperative antibiotic powder and 20 on HO prophylaxis. An additional eight articles were reviewed to describe background information. Five articles provided information for two or more treatment modalities and were therefore included in multiple categories when tabulating the number of articles reviewed per topic.

CONCLUSION

The literature supports the use of radiation therapy for HO prophylaxis, early (< 5 days from injury) surgical intervention and the routine use of intraoperative TXA. The literature does not support the routine use of iNPWT or IVCF. There is inadequate information to make a recommendation regarding the use of cell salvage and wound infiltration with antibiotic powder. While the routine use of chemical VTE prophylaxis is recommended, there is insufficient evidence to recommend the optimal agent and duration of therapy.

Ibero-American Society of Interventionism (SIDI) and the Spanish Society of Vascular and Interventional Radiology (SERVEI) Standard of Practice (SOP) for the Management of Inferior Vena Cava Filters in the Treatment of Acute Venous Thromboembolism

Objectives: to present an interventional radiology standard of practice on the use of inferior vena cava filters (IVCFs) in patients with or at risk to develop venous thromboembolism (VTE) from the Iberoamerican Interventional Society (SIDI) and Spanish Vascular and Interventional Radiology Society (SERVEI). Methods: a group of twenty-two interventional radiologist experts, from the SIDI and SERVEI societies, attended online meetings to develop a current clinical practice guideline on the proper indication for the placement and retrieval of IVCFs. A broad review was undertaken to determine the participation of interventional radiologists in the current guidelines and a consensus on inferior vena cava filters. Twenty-two experts from both societies worked on a common draft and received a questionnaire where they had to assess, for IVCF placement, the absolute, relative, and prophylactic indications. The experts voted on the different indications and reasoned their decision. Results: a total of two-hundred-thirty-three articles were reviewed. Interventional radiologists participated in the development of just two of the eight guidelines. The threshold for inclusion was 100% agreement. Three absolute and four relative indications for the IVCF placement were identified. No indications for the prophylactic filter placement reached the threshold. Conclusion: interventional radiologists are highly involved in the management of IVCFs but have limited participation in the development of multidisciplinary clinical practice guidelines.

Successful retrieval of dislocated inferior vena cava filter using double vascular sheaths docking technology: case report

BACKGROUND

Dislocation of inferior vena cava filter (IVCF) is a rare complication with potential IVC perforation and other life-threatening risks requiring early diagnosis and in-time retrieval. Most of dislocation IVCF in the past have been shelved or removed by open surgery. It is very difficult to retrieve the filters by interventional technology.

CASE PRESENTATION

Here we report a 49-year-old man suffering from dislocation of IVCF implanted due to deep vein thrombosis (DVT) in the right femoral vein. Successful retrieval of the IVCF using double sheaths docking technique was done soon after confirmation of the dislocation. Importance of monitoring and early detection of dislocation of IVCF should be emphasized to avoid further complications.

CONCLUSIONS

The double vascular sheaths docking technique can be considered as a preferential option in difficult operative situation.

May-Thurner syndrome and the risk of pulmonary embolism in patients with acute deep venous thrombosis

OBJECTIVE

Pulmonary embolism (PE) is the most common complication of deep venous thrombosis (DVT). May-Thurner syndrome (MTS) is known to increase the risk of DVT, but an association between MTS and PE has not been established. This study investigated an association between MTS and the risk of PE in patients with acute lower extremity DVT.

METHODS

Between June 2014 and September 2016, there were 112 patients with DVT at our hospital who underwent venous angiography and computed tomography pulmonary angiography. Data related to the patients' demographics, risk factors, disease onset time, side of DVT, D-dimer level, Doppler ultrasound, venous angiography, and computed tomography pulmonary angiography were collected. Associations between MTS and PE were analyzed.

RESULTS

The 112 DVT patients included 79 with MTS. The rate of DVT in the left lower extremity was higher in the MTS group (98.7%) than in the non-MTS group (48.5%; P < .001). PE was less common in the MTS group (50.6%) than in the non-MTS group (78.8%; P = .006). The multinomial logistic analysis revealed a significant negative correlation between MTS and PE. The correlation remained after applying adjustment models I, II, and III. Model I adjusted for risk factors, DVT side, and D-dimer tertile (odds ratio [OR], 0.17; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.04-0.68; P = .0125); model II adjusted for sex, age, risk factors, onset time, DVT side, D-dimer level, and D-dimer tertile (OR, 0.15; 95% CI, 0.03-0.71; P = .0162); and model III adjusted for sex, age, risk factors, onset time, DVT side, D-dimer level, D-dimer tertile, iliofemoral DVT, mixed (both iliofemoral and femoropopliteal) DVT, and femoropopliteal DVT (OR, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.06-2.08; P = .2501).

CONCLUSIONS

DVT patients with concomitant MTS have a decreased risk of PE compared with those without MTS. This finding extends previous reports of increased PE risk after DVT and calls for better understanding of shared risk factors and underlying mechanisms.

Treatment Outcomes of Anticoagulant Therapy and Temporary Inferior Vena Cava Filter Implantation for Pregnancy Complicated by Venous Thrombosis

Objective: Although deep vein thrombosis (DVT) followed by pulmonary thromboembolism (PE) is a critical complication during pregnancy, there have been few reports about its intrapartum management. We evaluated intrapartum management by using a temporary inferior vena cava filter (IVCF) in pregnant women with PE/DVT.

Materials and Methods: Eleven women with PE/DVT during pregnancy between January 2004 and December 2016 were included. The patients were hospitalized for intravenous unfractionated heparin infusion after acute PE/DVT onset. Seven patients were discharged and continued treatment with subcutaneous injection of heparin at the outpatient unit. IVCF was implanted 1–3 days before delivery in 10 patients. Anticoagulant therapy was discontinued 6–12 h before delivery. We retrospectively analyzed rates of maternal or perinatal death, and recurrence of symptomatic PE/DVT.

Results: One patient was diagnosed as having PE/DVT and 10 had DVT alone. One patient suffered hemorrhagic shock during delivery; however, maternal or perinatal death and recurrence of symptomatic PE/DVT did not occur in any patient.

Conclusion: Maternal or perinatal death and recurrence of symptomatic PE/DVT was not seen in women diagnosed as having PE/DVT during pregnancy and treated with anticoagulant therapy and IVCF.

Vena Cava Filters: A Synopsis of Complications and Related Topics

Deep venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolism constitute common preventable causes of morbidity and mortality. The incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) continues to increase. Standard anticoagulation therapy may reduce the risk of fatal PE by 75% and that of recurrent VTE by over 90%. For patients who are not candidates for anticoagulation, a vena cava filter (VCF) may be beneficial. Despite a good overall safety record, significant complications related to VCF are occasionally seen. This review discusses both procedural and non-procedural complications associated with VCF placement and use. We will also discuss VCF use in the settings of pregnancy, malignancy, and the clinical need for more than one filter.

Factors associated with reduced radiation exposure, cost, and technical difficulty of inferior vena cava filter placement and retrieval

We sought to delineate factors of inferior vena cava filter placement associated with increased radiation and cost and difficult subsequent retrieval. In total, 299 procedures from August 2013 to December 2014, 252 in a fluoroscopy suite (FS) and 47 in the operating room (OR), were reviewed for radiation exposure, fluoroscopy time, filter type, and angulation. The number of retrieval devices and fluoroscopy time needed for retrieval were assessed. Multiple linear regression assessed the impact of filter type, procedure location, and patient and procedural variables on radiation dose, fluoroscopy time, and filter angulation. Logistic regression assessed the impact of filter angulation, type, and filtration duration on retrieval difficulty. Access site and filter type had no impact on radiation exposure. However, placement in the OR, compared to the FS, entailed more radiation (156.3 vs 71.4 mGy; P = 0.001), fluoroscopy time (6.1 vs 2.8 min; P < 0.001), and filter angulation (4.8° vs 2.6°; P < 0.001). Angulation was primarily dependent on filter type (P = 0.02), with VenaTech and Denali filters associated with decreased angulation (2.2°, 2.4°) and Option filters associated with greater angulation (4.2°). Filter angulation, but not filter type or filtration duration, predicted cases requiring >1 retrieval device (P < 0.001) and >30 min fluoroscopy time (P = 0.02). Cost savings for placement in the FS vs OR were estimated at $444.50 per case. In conclusion, increased radiation and cost were associated with placement in the OR. Filter angulation independently predicted difficult filter retrieval; angulation was determined by filter type. Performing filter placement in the FS using specific filters may reduce radiation and cost while enabling future retrieval.

Multimodal Therapy for Acute and Chronic Venous Thrombotic and Occlusive Disease

Critical deep venous thrombosis and occlusion constitutes a small percentage of patients with venous disease. However, these patients exhibit severe symptomatology including pain and extensive edema that may progress to limb-or life-threatening complications such as phlegmasia cerulea dolens and superior vena cava syndrome. This paper reviews the different multimodal percutaneous interventions currently available for the treatment of complex critical venous thrombotic and occlusive disease.

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.

Percutaneous Management of Extensive Clot Trapped in a Temporary Vena Cava Filter

Purpose:

To present percutaneous management of extensive clot trapped in a temporary inferior vena cava (IVC) filter.

Case Report:

A 20-year-old man with a large sacral tumor and left external iliac vein thrombosis had a wire-mounted Günther temporary filter (GTF) prophylactically placed in the infrarenal IVC prior to tumor resection. The 7-day postsurgical venogram prior to filter removal showed extensive clot trapped by the filter, as well as interval cephalic migration, with the filter tip now at the level of the renal veins. A Günther Tulip MReye (GTM) filter was deployed but not released above the renal veins to prevent clot migration during caudal withdrawal of the wire-mounted GTF. After creating enough space in the infrarenal IVC, the GTM was repositioned and fully released with its apex now below the renal veins. The GTF was then uneventfully removed. There was no clinical evidence for significant pulmonary embolism 12 months after placement.

Conclusions:

Cephalic migration of a clotted temporary IVC filter can be managed with intraprocedural protection against pulmonary embolism by first deploying a Günther Tulip filter above the renal veins, with subsequent advancement below the renal veins before temporary filter removal.

Optional Vena Cava Filters: What, Why, and When

Optional vena cava filters can used to provide either short-term or permanent protection from pulmonary embolism. These devices have recently become available for clinical use in the United States. However, there remains a paucity of data about these devices and their outcomes. This article reviews current and future devices, the rationale behind non-permanent caval filtration, and the generally accepted guidelines for their clinical application.

Utility of Retrievable Vena Cava Filters and Mechanical Thrombectomy in the Endovascular Management of Acute Deep Venous Thrombosis

Endovascular interventions of symptomatic deep venous thrombosis (DVT) using various therapeutic modalities, such as thrombolysis, mechanical thrombectomy, and inferior vena cava (IVC) filter placement, have received increased focus owing in part to advances in catheter-based interventional technologies. Although systemic anticoagulation remains the primary treatment modality in DVT, catheter-based interventions can provide rapid removal of large thrombus burden and possibly preserve venous valvular function in patients with symptomatic DVT. This article reviews current endovascular treatment strategies for acute DVT. Specifically, the utility of mechanical thrombectomy along with various temporary IVC filters in the setting of DVT is examined. Lastly, an illustrative case of acute DVT that was treated with endovascular intervention with IVC filter placement is presented.

Prophylactic Placement of an Inferior Vena Cava Filter During Aspiration Thrombectomy for Acute Deep Venous Thrombosis of the Lower Extremity

Purpose:

To evaluate the effect of an inferior vena cava (IVC) filter during aspiration thrombectomy for acute deep vein thrombosis (DVT) in the lower extremity.

Materials and Methods:

From July 2004 to December 2013, a retrospective analysis of 106 patients with acute DVT was performed. All patients received an IVC filter and were treated initially with aspiration thrombectomy. Among the 106 patients, DVT extension into the IVC was noted in 27 but was not evident in 79. We evaluated the presence of trapped thrombi in the filters after the procedure. The sizes of the trapped thrombi were classified into 2 grades based on the ratio of the maximum transverse length of the trapped thrombus to the diameter of the IVC (Grades I [≤ 50%] and II [> 50%]).

Results:

A trapped thrombus in the filter was detected in 46 (43%) of 106 patients on final venograms. The sizes of the trapped thrombi were grade I in 12 (26.1%) patients and grade II in 34 (73.9%). Among the 27 patients with DVT extension into the IVC, 20 (74.1%) showed a trapped thrombus in the filter, 75% (15 of 20) of which were grade II. Among the 79 patients without DVT extension into the IVC, 26 (32.9%) showed a trapped thrombus in the IVC filter, 73% (19 of 26) of which were grade II.

Conclusions:

Thrombus migration occurred frequently during aspiration thrombectomy of patients with acute DVT in the lower extremity. However, further studies are needed to establish a standard protocol for the prophylactic placement of an IVC filter during aspiration thrombectomy.

Use of Prophylactic Inferior Vena Cava Filters in Trauma

Venous thromboembolisms, specifically pulmonary embolisms (PEs), represent a significant burden on healthcare systems worldwide, particularly within the setting of trauma. According to the literature, PEs are the most common cause of in-hospital death; however, this condition can be prevented with a variety of prophylactic and therapeutic measures. This article aimed to examine current evidence on the use, indications for prophylaxis, outcomes and complications of prophylactic inferior vena cava filters in trauma patients.

Inferior vena cava filters: current best practices

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common cause of inpatient and outpatient morbidity and mortality. While anticoagulant therapy is considered the primary means of prevention and treatment of VTE, inferior vena cava filters (IVCFs) are often used as an alternative or adjunct to anticoagulation. With the advent of retrievable filters indications have liberalized, to include placement for primary prophylaxis in high-risk patients. However, this practice is based on limited evidence supporting their efficacy in preventing clinically relevant outcomes. Since indiscriminate use of IVCFs can be associated with net patient harm and increased health care costs, knowledge of the literature surrounding IVCF utilization is critical for providers to adopt best practices. In this review, we will provide an overview of the literature as it relates to specific clinical questions that arise when considering IVCF utilization in the prevention and treatment of VTE. Practice-based recommendations will be reviewed to provide the clinician with guidance on challenging clinical scenarios.

Methods and Guidelines for Venous Thromboembolism Prevention in Polytrauma Patients with Pelvic and Acetabular Fractures

Sequential compression devices and chemical prophylaxis are the standard venous thromboembolism (VTE) prevention for trauma patients with acetabular and pelvic fractures. Current chemical pharmacological contemplates the use of heparins or fondaparinux. Other anticoagulants include coumarins and aspirin, however these oral agents can be challenging to administer and may need monitoring. When contraindications to anticoagulation in high-risk patients are present, prophylactic inferior vena cava filters can be an option to prevent pulmonary emboli. Unfortunately strong evidence about the most effective method, and the timing of their commencement, in patients with pelvic and acetabular fractures remains controversial.

Geometric changes of the inferior vena cava in trauma patients subjected to volume resuscitation

OBJECTIVE

Dynamic changes in anatomic geometry of the inferior vena cava from changes in intravascular volume may cause passive stresses on inferior vena cava filters. In this study, we aim to quantify variability in inferior vena cava dimensions and anatomic orientation to determine how intravascular volume changes may impact complications of inferior vena cava filter placement, such as migration, tilting, perforation, and thrombosis.

METHODS

Retrospective computed tomography measurements of major axis, minor axis, and horizontal diameters of the inferior vena cava at 1 and 5 cm below the lowest renal vein in 58 adult trauma patients in pre-resuscitative (hypovolemic) and post-resuscitative (euvolemic) states were assessed in a blinded fashion by two independent readers. Inferior vena cava perimeter, area, and volume were calculated and correlated with caval orientation.

RESULTS

Mean volumes of the inferior vena cava segment on pre- and post-resuscitation scans were 9.0 cm(3) and 11.0 cm(3), respectively, with mean percentage increase of 48.6% (P < 0.001). At 1 cm and 5 cm below the lowest renal vein, the inferior vena cava expanded anisotropically, with the minor axis expanding by an average of 48.7% (P < 0.001) and 30.0% (P = 0.01), respectively, while the major axis changed by only 4.2% (P = 0.11) and 6.6% (P = 0.017), respectively. Cross-sectional area and perimeter at 1 cm below the lowest renal vein expanded by 61.6% (P < 0.001) and 10.7% (P < 0.01), respectively. At 5 cm below the lowest renal vein, the expansion of cross-sectional area and perimeter were 43.9% (P < 0.01) and 10.7% (P = 0.002), respectively. The major axis of the inferior vena cava was oriented in a left-anterior oblique position in all patients, averaging 20° from the horizontal plane. There was significant underestimation of inferior vena cava maximal diameter by horizontal measurement. In pre-resuscitation scans, at 1 cm and 5 cm below the lowest renal vein, the discrepancy between the horizontal and major axis diameter was 2.1 ± 1.2 mm (P < 0.001) and 1.7 ± 1.0 mm (P < 0.001), respectively, while post-resuscitation studies showed the same underestimation at 1 cm and 5 cm below the lowest renal vein to be 2.2 ± 1.2 mm (P < 0.01) and 1.9 ± 1.0 mm (P < 0.01), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

There is significant anisotropic variability of infrarenal inferior vena cava geometry with significantly greater expansive and compressive forces in the minor axis. There can be significant volumetric changes in the inferior vena cava with associated perimeter changes but the major axis left-anterior oblique caval configuration is always maintained. These significant dynamic forces may impact inferior vena cava filter stability after implantation. The consistent major axis left-anterior oblique obliquity may lead to underestimation of the inferior vena cava diameter used in standard anteroposterior venography, which may influence initial filter selection.

Successful cases of difficult inferior vena cava filter retrieval with the use of biopsy forceps: Biopsy forceps technique

Objectives:

For treatment and prevention of deep vein thrombosis(DVT) and pulmonary embolism(PE), retrievable inferior vena cava(IVC) filters have commonly been used as an effective bridge to anticoagulation. However, we experienced unexpected difficulty in endovascular retrieval of some IVC filters. Most problems were due to endovascular treatment devices issues, filter intimal migration, filter disintegration, filter-associated thrombosis, and right atrium/ventricle migration.

Methods:

Disposable biopsy forceps was used to engage the filter hook and reform the shape of the filter struts. Endovascular retrieval assisted by use of the biopsy forceps via a similar vein was effective and provided a less-invasive, low cost method for removal of problematic IVC filters.

Results:

We described easily performed methods that uses disposable biopsy forceps for the retrieval of IVC filters that are difficult to remove because of filter hook migration into the caval wall.

Conclusion:

We developed an easily performed method that uses intestine biopsy forceps for the retrieval of IVC filter that are difficult to remove.

Training on insertion and retrieval of optional inferior vena cava filters for interventional radiologists with little or just some experience with the combined use of blood vessel and animal models

Purpose

To evaluate the usefulness of a tool that we developed to simulate performance of insertion and retrieval of optional inferior vena cava filters to be additionally used in training of beginners with an animal model.

Subjects and methods

Thirty young doctors who had little or no experience in insertion and/or retrieval of filters were subjects of this study to evaluate the training tool. Eleven trainees practiced both insertion and retrieval of filters first with the animal model then with the blood vessel model while 19 trainees first practiced with the blood vessel model then with the animal model.

Results

All trainees successfully inserted the filter. Two of the 11 trainees who used the animal model before the blood vessel model failed in retrieval, and 2 of the 19 trainees who used the blood vessel model before the animal model failed. In the former group, mean time for filter implantation and withdrawal in the animal model was 75 ± 62 s and 341 ± 238 s, respectively, and in the latter group were 54 ± 16 s and 311 ± 236 s, respectively.

Conclusion

Training with the combination of a blood vessel model and animal model is helpful for beginners to learn to insert and withdraw optional filters.

Successful removal of a Gunther tulip vena cava filter with wall-embedded hook and migration during a retrieval attempt

Retrieval of a Gunther tulip vena cava filter implanted in a patient with inferior vena cava and right common iliac vein thrombosis was attempted by the standard method. Because the filter was tilted, the hook became attached to the vena cava wall and could not be snared. During attempts at removal by an alternative method, the filter migrated toward the right atrium. However, it was finally successfully removed.

Retrievable vena cava filters: a clinical review

Venous thromboembolism (VTE), including deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism (PE), is a major cause of morbidity and mortality. Parenteral anticoagulant treatment with full-dose unfractioned heparin, low-molecular-weight-heparin, or fondaparinux, followed by oral treatment with the vitamin K antagonists, is recommended for the majority of patients. However, in the presence of contraindications to anticoagulant treatment, bleeding complications during antithrombotic treatment, or VTE recurrences despite optimal anticoagulation, interruption of the inferior vena cava with a filter is a potential option aimed to prevent life-threatening PE. Currently, the vast majority of filters implanted worldwide are of the permanent type, but their use is associated with a number of long term complications. Non-permanent filters represent an important alternative, and in particular retrievable filters are an attractive option because they may be either left in place permanently or safely retrieved after a quite long period when they become unnecessary. In this review, we summarize the currently available literature regarding retrievable vena cava filters and we discuss current evidences on their efficacy and safety. Moreover, the appropriate indications for their use in daily clinical practice are reviewed.

Complications of temporary vena cava filter placement

BACKGROUND

Temporary vena cava filters have been used for protection from potentially fatal pulmonary embolism. However, recent reports suggested that they may be associated with serious adverse complications including filter-related thrombosis. The purpose of this study was to examine the clinical complications of temporary vena cava filter placement.

METHODS

We enrolled 40 consecutive patients from January 2006 to December 2010 who underwent percutaneous temporary vena cava filter insertion in Saitama Medical Center, Jichi Medical University.

RESULTS

Major filter complications related to temporary vena cava filters were filter thrombosis in 4 patients (10.2%), filter dislocation in 4 (10.2%), and catheter-related infection in 3 (7.7%). Massive pulmonary embolism and cardiogenic shock was observed in one case (2.5%) at the time of retraction.

CONCLUSION

Temporary filter placement was associated with a high incidence of device-related complications. The benefit of temporary filter placement should be judiciously weighed against the risk of complications.

Interventional treatment of venous thromboembolism: a review

Venous thromboembolism (VTE), including deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE), is the third most common cardiovascular disease after coronary artery disease and cerebrovascular disease and is responsible for significant morbidity and mortality in the general population. Full dose anticoagulation is the standard therapy for VTE, both for the acute and the long-term phase. The latest guidelines of the American College of Chest Physicians recommend treatment with a full-dose of unfractioned heparin (UFH), low-molecular-weight-heparin (LMWH), fondaparinux, vitamin K antagonist (VKA) or thrombolysis for most patients with objectively confirmed VTE. Catheter-guided thrombolysis and trombosuction are interventional approaches that should be used only in selected populations; interruption of the inferior vena cava (IVC) with a filter can be performed to prevent life-threatening PE in patients with VTE and contraindications to anticoagulant treatment, bleeding complications during antithrombotic treatment, or VTE recurrences despite optimal anticoagulation. In this review we summarize the currently available literature regarding interventional approaches for VTE treatment (vena cava filters, catheter-guided thrombolysis, thrombosuction) and we discuss current evidences on their efficacy and safety. Moreover, the appropriate indications for their use in daily clinical practice are reviewed.

Complications of inferior vena caval filters

Inferior vena caval filters have been shown to be effective in the prevention of pulmonary embolism, with low morbidity and mortality associated with their implantation. Awareness of potential complications can further decrease the risk of filter placement and lead to early detection and management of complications to improve clinical outcomes. The purpose of this article is to review the procedure-related and delayed complications associated with inferior vena caval filters.

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

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 self-expandable 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.

Evaluation of an active vena cava filter for MR imaging in a swine model

PURPOSE

To evaluate the feasibility of magnetic resonance (MR) imaging-guided placement of an active vena cava filter (AVCF) in a swine model, the effectiveness of the system in filtering thrombi, and the detection of thrombi with MR imaging.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study was approved by the government committee on animal investigations. An AVCF tuned to the Larmor frequency of a 1.5-T MR unit was placed in the inferior vena cava (IVC) of seven pigs under real-time MR imaging guidance. Steady-state free precession sequences with four different flip angles (90°, 40°, 25°, and 15°), T1-weighted turbo spin-echo sequences with two flip angles (90° and 15°), and black-blood proton-density-weighted sequences with a flip angle of 90° were performed before and after filter placement. In six cases, extracorporeally produced thrombi were injected through the femoral access to test filter function. The signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) were assessed before and after filter deployment and compared by using the signed-rank test.

RESULTS

All AVCFs were successfully deployed. Significant differences (P < .05) in the SNR and CNR of the IVC were found before and after AVCF placement and between sequences with different flip angles. Intravenous thrombi were caught in all cases and clearly depicted with MR imaging. On black-blood proton-density-weighted images, high-signal-intensity thrombi inside the filter were clearly detectable without any overlaying artifacts.

CONCLUSION

MR imaging-guided deployment and monitoring of an AVCF is feasible. The AVCF enhances the SNR and CNR, resulting in clear depiction of thrombi inside the filter without the need for contrast material. Design modifications for improved intracaval fixation and retrieval of the prototype AVCF will be required.

Clinical outcome of perioperative nonpermanent vena cava filter placement in patients with deep venous thrombosis or blood stasis of the vein

PURPOSE

To evaluate the recent clinical experience with nonpermanent inferior vena cava (IVC) filter placement preoperatively, especially with regard to patients who had deep venous thrombosis (DVT) due to compression by a tumor or an aneurysm.

METHODS

Preoperative prophylactic IVC filter placement was performed between October 2002 and March 2008 in 48 of 83 patients who underwent IVC filter placement. IVC filter placement was performed preoperatively in 35 of the 48 patients due to DVT located distally in an iliac vein or due to IVC compression by a tumor or aneurysm. This study examined the early and mid-term outcomes resulting from nonpermanent IVC filter placement.

RESULTS

The mean implantation period was 11.1 +/- 9.3 days (range, 3-56 days). Three patients (8.6%) experienced minor complications during the IVC filter placement. A thrombus was captured in the filter in 4 patients (8.8%). One patient in whom the filter was left as a permanent filter died during the follow-up period. No patient experienced any pulmonary embolus during the follow-up period.

CONCLUSION

Nonpermanent IVC filter insertion is perioperatively useful in surgical procedures that eliminate the compression of the vein by an excision of either the tumor or aneurysm compressing the vein.

Venous thromboembolism after removal of retrievable inferior vena cava filters

The purpose of this study was to examine the incidence of new or recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE) after retrieval of inferior vena cava (IVC) filters and risk factors associated with such recurrence. Between March 2001 and September 2008, at our institution, implanted retrievable vena cava filters were retrieved in 76 patients. The incidence of new or recurrent VTE after retrieval was reviewed and numerous variables were analyzed to assess risk factors for redevelopment of VTE after filter retrieval. In 5 (6.6%) of the 76 patients, redevelopment or worsening of VTE was seen after retrieval of the filter. Three patients (4.0%) had recurrent deep venous thrombosis (DVT) in the lower extremities and 2 (2.6%) had development of pulmonary embolism, resulting in death. Although there was no significant difference in the incidence of new or recurrent VTE related to any risk factor investigated, a tendency for development of VTE after filter retrieval was higher in patients in whom DVT in the lower extremities had been so severe during filter implantation that interventional radiological therapies in addition to traditional anticoagulation therapies were required (40% in patients with recurrent VTE vs. 23% in those without VTE; p = 0.5866 according to Fisher’s exact probability test) and in patients in whom DVT remained at the time of filter retrieval (60% in patients with recurrent VTE vs. 37% in those without VTE; p = 0.3637). In conclusion, new or recurrent VTE was rare after retrieval of IVC filters but was most likely to occur in patients who had severe DVT during filter implantation and/or in patients with a DVT that remained at the time of filter retrieval. We must point out that the fatality rate from PE after filter removal was high (2.6%).

Optional vena cava filters: indications, management, and results

BACKGROUND

When anticoagulation is contraindicated or ineffective, optional vena cava filters can be used to prevent pulmonary embolism. These devices can be removed within a defined period of time or can remain in the vena cava permanently.

METHODS

The status of optional vena cava filters was studied by a review of the relevant literature found in a selective Medline search from 2000 to 2008, including a Cochrane review and published guidelines.

RESULTS

Optional vena cava filter can be removed up to 20 weeks or even longer after insertion (depending on the filter model) in a small interventional radiological procedure if therapeutic anticoagulation has been achieved or the patient is no longer at risk for venous thromboembolism. Current studies show comparable results for optional filters and permanent filters, but there have not yet been any prospective studies comparing the two filter types.

CONCLUSIONS

Optional vena cava filters are an important addition to the management of venous thromboembolic disease. As only limited data are available to date, the use of optional filters should be considered on an individual case basis.

Penetration of Günther Tulip filter struts through an introducer sheath: case report and safety concerns

The authors present a patient who had a Günther-Tulip inferior vena cava filter placed under fluoroscopic guidance. The filter struts were seen to penetrate through the introducer sheath at deployment. This was believed to be secondary to a kink in the sheath at the site of venous entry and was due to the patient's nuchal obesity as well as his inability to turn his head to the opposite side. The introducer sheath was then placed through a long reinforced metal sheath through which the filter was then placed without complication.

The effect of a temporary inferior vena cava filter in the treatment of deep vein thrombosis in critically-ill patients

We 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.

Recurrence of pulmonary embolism in young man with retroperitoneal tumor despite insertion of temporary IVC filter

Pulmonary embolism (PE) is a fatal disease that is very rare in young people. A 21-year-old man developed PE because of a retroperitoneal tumor. The inferior vena cava (IVC) was obstructed by the tumor, and thrombus existed in the right common iliac vein. Thrombolysis and heparinization improved his symptoms prior to urgent tumor resection. A temporary IVC filter was inserted the day before the operation, but 8 h later fatal massive PE occurred. At autopsy, the retroperitoneal tumor was revealed as a metastatic choriocarcinoma. Prophylactic use of a temporary IVC filter might have paradoxically induced recurrence of massive PE in this case.

Symptomatic ileofemoral DVT after onset of oral contraceptive use in women with previously undiagnosed May-Thurner Syndrome

OBJECTIVE

May-Thurner syndrome is characterized by left common iliac obstruction secondary to compression of the left iliac vein by the right common iliac artery against the fifth-lumbar vertebra. This anatomic variant results in an increased incidence of left-sided deep venous thrombosis (DVT). Furthermore, while a preponderance of left-sided DVT has been demonstrated in women during pregnancy and oral contraceptive use, patients are not typically screened for this condition after developing a left-sided DVT. As anticoagulation alone is ineffective for DVT treatment in the setting of May-Thurner anatomy, more aggressive treatment is warranted. Failure to diagnosis this condition predisposes these women to the unnecessary risks of recurrent DVT and post-thrombotic syndrome.

METHODS

We present the occurrence of 7 adolescent patients with previously undiagnosed May-Thurner syndrome who presented with DVT after the initiation of oral contraceptive steroids (OCP) use. All 7 patients elected to proceed with mechanical thrombolysis/catheter based thrombolysis followed by endovascular stenting and were postoperatively treated with 6 months of warfarin.

RESULTS

Mean patient age was 18.3 +/- 3.3 years (range, 16-24 years). Mean time to presentation after initiation of OCP was 5 weeks (range, 2-10 weeks). Mean time to intervention was 16.8 days (range, 10-24 days). All patients were treated with mechanical thrombectomy. Our rate of intraoperative clot resolution was 100%. All 7 patients were treated with self expanding nitinol stents after angioplasty of the iliac vein stenosis with resolution of the stenotic segment. Primary stent patency is 100% (7/7). Mean follow-up time is 13 +/- 13.84 months (range, 6-42 months). There have been no long-term complications related to surgical treatment or anticoagulation. All 7 patients have experienced resolution of left leg swelling and pain and have no evidence of post-thrombotic syndrome or DVT recurrence to date.

CONCLUSIONS

Women on OCPs presenting with left-sided iliofemoral DVT should be screened for hypercoagulable disorders and underlying May-Thurner anatomy. Treatment of May-Thurner syndrome should include thrombolysis/thrombectomy and anticoagulation for current DVT in addition to angioplasty and stenting of the underlying obstruction.

Endovascular treatment of venous occlusive disease

Endovascular treatment of acute and chronic iliac vein occlusions has proven to be safe and effective. Recanalization of chronic occlusions with balloon angioplasty and stenting can re-establish normal venous flow in the iliac veins and the IVC and relieve symptoms in the majority of treated patients. CDT with recanalization and stenting of underlying chronically obstructed iliofemoral segments is becoming the treatment of choice for patients with acute iliofemoral thrombosis, as anticoagulation and compression therapy alone are not satisfactory in preventing PTS. The new treatment modalities offer stimulating options for a patient group that is not adequately treated, neither by medical nor open surgical therapy. The substantial effort and additional costs of endovascular treatment appear to be justified by the encouraging mid-term results both for patients with acute and chronic occlusive iliofemoral disease. However, multi-center randomized prospective studies are required to further validate the role of these techniques.