Introducer curving technique to reduce tilting of transfemoral Gunther Tulip IVC filter: in vitro study

Over-the-wire deployment techniques of option elite inferior vena cava filter: 3D printing vena cava phantom study

•

Bent stiff-wire technique with transfemoral access had lower filter tilt ratio at Option IVC filter deployment.

•

Original push wire with transjugular access had lower filter tilt ratio at Option IVC filter deployment.

•

Filter jumping was common using the original push wire with transjugular access.

Purpose

To compare filter tilt and filter jumping during Option inferior vena cava (IVC) filter deployment with 3 different wires techniques using a 3-dimensional (3D) printing vena cava phantom.

Materials and methods

An IVC 3D printed vena cava phantom was made from a healthy young male’s computed tomographic data. Option IVC filters were deployed with 3 different wires: i) original push wire, ii) hydrophilic stiff wire, and iii) bent stiff wire. Right internal jugular and right femoral access were used 5 times with each wire. Filter tilt angle, tilt ratio, jumping, and tip abutment to the IVC wall were analyzed.

Results

The transfemoral approach with original push wire had significantly higher tilt angle than did the transjugular approach (6.1˚ ± 1.9 vs. 3.5˚ ± 1.3, p = 0.04). Mean tilt ratio was significantly lower with the bent wire with transfemoral access (0.49 ± 0.13 vs. 0.78 ± 0.18 [original push-wire] and 0.67 ± 0.08 [stiff wire], p = 0.019). The ratio was lower also with original push wire with transjugular access (0.34 ± 0.19 vs. 0.57 ±0.11 [stiff wire] and 0.58 ±0.17 [bent wire], p = 0.045). Filter jumping occurred more often with the transjugular approach with original push wire than with stiff or bent-wire delivery. Filter tip abutment to the IVC wall occurred only with the transfemoral approach.

Conclusions

Bent wire with transfemoral access and original push wire with transjugular access had lower filter tilt ratio at Option IVC filter deployment. However, filter jumping was common using the original push wire with transjugular access.

Femoral versus jugular access for Denali Vena Cava Filter placement: Analysis of fluoroscopic time, filter tilt and retrieval outcomes

PURPOSE

To analyze relevant metrics involved in Denali Vena Cava Filter placement via different venous access sites.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients with Denali filters inserted between March 2017 and February 2018 were retrospectively analyzed. Pre-procedural and pre-retrieval computed tomography (CT) were reviewed. We compared inferior vena cava (IVC) diameter, filter tilt angle, filter tip IVC wall abutment, fluoroscopy time, and retrieval outcomes by venous access site. Filter tip abutment/limb penetration and procedure-related complications were investigated.

RESULTS

Seventy-eight patients had successfully-placed Denali filters. Seventy-one of 78 (91%) patients had both pre-procedural and pre-retrieval CT. The majority (35 [49%]) were placed via the right femoral vein (left femoral vein: 22 [31%]; right internal jugular vein: 14 [20%]). The jugular approach involved a longer fluoroscopy time (mean 117 ± 37 s [s]) than the right and left femoral approaches (mean 64 ± 21 s, mean 67 ± 15 s, respectively [p < 0.05]). Filter tilt and filter tip abutment were not significantly different between the 3 access routes. Filter tip abutment and limb penetration were observed in 8/71 (11%) and 2/71 (3%) patients, respectively. Filter retrieval was attempted in 68 of 78 (87%) cases, and all filters were successfully retrieved. One filter arm fractured during advanced retrieval; no other procedure related complications were recorded.

CONCLUSIONS

Both femoral venous approaches can be safely used for placement of the Denali filter. Femoral venous access involved a shorter fluoroscopy time without any differences in filter tilt and filter tip abutment compared to transjugular access.