[First experiences with temporary vena cava filters]

Gross haematuria associated with penetration of an inferior vena cava filter into the right renal collecting system

Inferior vena cava (IVC) filters are a viable alternative for patients with venous thromboembolic disease for whom standard anticoagulation therapy is contraindicated. Rare complications associated with their use, however, include misplacement and IVC penetration. We report a case of a 63-year-old woman who developed gross haematuria following IVC filter penetration into both the right renal collecting system and renal pelvis, for which open caval removal and reconstruction was required. This is an unusual case of IVC filter penetration causing symptomatic haematuria and requiring surgical intervention.

Use of a temporary caval filter in a young man with pulmonary embolism to prevent migration of massive caval thrombus during an attempt of caval thrombolysis

A 33 year old male with no known risk factors for hypercoagulability developed a massive thrombi in the inferior vena cava (IVC). The patient had a history of both pulmonary embolism and embolism related syncope. The thrombus which extended proximally to the level of the renal vein and distally to the left superficial femoral vein did not respond to anticoagulant therapy or thrombolysis. Thirteen days after admission, we decided to use a temporary caval filter to provide protection from migration of the thrombus while attempting invasive thrombolytic therapy, which was performed using a tissue type plasminogen activator through a coaxial catheter of the temporary filter. This resulted in a marked decrease in the size of the thrombus, and multiple thrombi were found to be trapped in the temporary filter. Although the temporary caval filter was effective in capturing emboli, resulting in a decrease in the thrombus size, the thrombus was not completely dissolved within two weeks, which is the maximal implantation time. A permanent filter was eventually used to prevent pulmonary embolism, which could arise from the remaining thrombus. We have found placement of a temporary caval filter to be a safe and effective adjunct, in select cases, when attempting thrombolysis of massive thrombi in the IVC. Since we inserted the temporary filter 13 days after admission, use of a temporary filter during thrombolysis may have been more effective if conducted earlier in our patient's clinical course.

Indications, management, and complications of temporary inferior vena cava filters

PURPOSE

We describe the results of a preliminary prospective study using different recently developed temporary and retrievable inferior vena cava (IVC) filters.

METHODS

Fifty temporary IVC filters (Günther, Günther Tulip, Anthéor) were inserted in 47 patients when the required period of protection against pulmonary embolism (PE) was estimated to be less than 2 weeks. The indications were documented deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and temporary contraindications for anticoagulation, a high risk for PE, and PE despite DVT prophylaxis.

RESULTS

Filters were removed 1-12 days after placement and nine (18%) had captured thrombi. Complications were one PE during and after removal of a filter, two minor filter migrations, and one IVC thrombosis.

CONCLUSION

Temporary filters are effective in trapping clots and protecting against PE, and the complication rate does not exceed that of permanent filters. They are an alternative when protection from PE is required temporarily, and should be considered in patients with a normal life expectancy.

Use of temporary vena cava filters after catheter-directed fragmentation and thrombolysis in patients with acute pulmonary thromboembolism

Acute pulmonary thromboembolism is a life-threatening disease and in almost all cases originates from deep venous thrombosis in the proximal deep venous system of the legs. In order to prevent further episodes of thromboembolism in 2 patients with acute pulmonary thromboembolism, we inserted an Antheor temporary vena cava filter after catheter-directed fragmentation and thrombolysis. No complications occurred during the insertion of the filters and our results suggest that this filter device may be clinically safe and effective for temporary protection against pulmonary thromboembolism.

MR-guided placement of a temporary vena cava filter: technique and feasibility

The purpose of this paper was to investigate the feasibility of MR-guided insertion of a temporary vena cava filter on an open low-field imager. In vivo procedures were performed on four anesthetized pigs using a common nonferromagnetic temporary vena cava filter and a special prototype guidewire developed for vascular interventions guided by low-field MRI. Breath-hold spoiled gradient-echo sequences (fast low-angle shot [FLASH]) with flow compensation were used for position monitoring of the passively visualized intravascular devices. Using the described technique and equipment, all steps of the procedure were feasible in the MR unit. Practicability of the procedure seems to be sufficient for clinical purposes but was inferior compared to the conventional technique of filter placement.

The Günther temporary inferior vena cava filter for short-term protection against pulmonary embolism

PURPOSE

To evaluate clinically the Günther temporary inferior vena cava (IVC) filter.

METHODS

Eleven IVC filters were placed in 10 patients. Indications for filter placement were surgical pulmonary embolectomy in seven patients, pulmonary embolism in two patients, and free-floating iliofemoral thrombus in one patient. Eight filters were inserted from the right femoral approach, three filters from the left. Follow-up was by plain abdominal radiographs, cavography, and duplex ultrasound (US). Eight patients received systemic heparinization. Follow-up, during 4-60 months after filter removal was by clinical assessment, and imaging of the lungs was performed when pulmonary embolism (PE) was suspected. Patients received anticoagulation therapy for at least 6 months.

RESULTS

Ten filters were removed without complications 7-14 days (mean 10 days) after placement. One restless patient pulled the filter back into the common femoral vein, and a permanent filter was placed. In two patients a permanent filter was placed prior to removal. One patient developed sepsis, and one an infection at the insertion site. Clinically no recurrent PE developed with the filter in place or during removal. One patient had recurrent PE 7 months after filter removal.

CONCLUSION

The Günther temporary IVC filter can be safely placed for short-term protection against PE. The use of this filter is not appropriate in agitated or immunocompromised patients.