Retrievable inferior vena cava filters for venous thromboembolism

Effect of inferior vena cava filter placement position on device complications

BACKGROUND

Indwelling inferior vena cava (IVC) filters can cause complications, including penetration into surrounding structures, migration, and thrombosis of the vena cava. Computational fluid dynamics suggests juxtarenal placement of IVC filters decreases the risk of thrombosis; however, this has not been explored clinically. The present study examines the effect of filter placement position on long-term device complications with an emphasis on IVC thrombosis. We hypothesized that IVC filters placed further caudal to the renal veins were more likely to develop long-term thrombosis.

METHODS

A retrospective review of the medical records of patients receiving IVC filters at a single tertiary center between 2008 and 2016 was performed. Patients missing follow-up or procedural imaging data were excluded. The placement procedure venograms were reviewed, and the distance from the filter apex to the more inferior renal vein was measured using reported IVC filter lengths for calibration. The patients were divided into three groups according to the tip position relative to the more inferior renal vein: at or superior (group A), 1 to 20 mm inferior (group B), and >20 mm inferior (group C). The patient and procedural characteristics and outcomes were compared between the three groups. The primary end points were IVC thrombosis and device-related mortality.

RESULTS

Of 1497 eligible patients, 267 (17.8%) were excluded. The most common placement position was group B (64.0%). The mean age was lowest in group C, followed by groups A and B (age, 59.5 years, 64.6 years, and 62.2 years, respectively; P = .003). No statistically significant differences were found in the distribution of sex or the measured comorbidities. Group C was the most likely to receive jugular access (group C, 71.7%; group A, 48.3%; group B, 62.4%; P < .001) and received more first-generation filters (group C, 58.5%; group A, 46.6%; group B, 52.5%; P = .045). The short-term (<30-day) and long-term (≥30-day) outcomes, including access site hematoma, deep vein thrombosis, and pulmonary embolism, were uncommon, with no differences between the groups. Cases of symptomatic filter penetration, migration, and fracture were rare (one, one, and three cases, respectively). Although a pattern of increasing thrombosis with more inferior placement was found, the difference between groups was not statistically significant (group A, 1.5%; group B, 1.8%; group C, 2.5%; P = .638). No cases of device-related mortality occurred. All-cause mortality after a mean follow-up of 2.6 ± 2.3 years was 41.3% and did not vary significantly between the groups (P = .051). Multivariate logistic regression revealed that placement position did not predict for short- or long-term deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, IVC thrombosis, or all-cause mortality after adjustment for the baseline patient characteristics.

CONCLUSIONS

IVC filters have low rates of short- and long-term complications, including IVC thrombosis. The placement position did not affect the occurrence of device complications in this study.

Prevention, Diagnostics and Treatment of Deep Vein Thrombosis. Russian Experts Consensus

The guidelines are developed in accordance with the requirements of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation by the all-Russian public organization «Association of Phlebologists of Russia» with participation of the Association of Cardiovascular Surgeons of Russia, the Russian Society of Surgeons, the Russian Society of Angiologists and Vascular Surgeons, the Association of Traumatologists and Orthopedists of Russia, the Association of Oncologists of Russia, the Russian Society of Clinical Oncology, Russian Society of Oncohematologists, Russian Society of Cardiology, Russian Society of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.

Cost Burden and Cost Influencers of Inferior Vena Cava Filter Placement and Retrieval among Medicare Beneficiaries with Acute Venous Thromboembolism

PURPOSE

To examine the frequency, costs, and cost influencers of inferior vena cava filters (IVCFs) placements and retrievals among a national sample of patients using Medicare data.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective cohort study used the U.S. Medicare 100% database, a nationally representative sample of all U.S. patients aged ≥65 years, from 2014 through 2020. Procedures and clinical characteristics were identified from the diagnosis and procedure codes on Medicare claims. Beneficiaries aged ≥65 years with newly diagnosed venous thromboembolism (VTE) were identified and followed to obtain data on IVCF placements and retrievals. Data on the costs of the index IVCF procedures and any subsequent IVCF placements and retrievals were obtained. Multivariate models were used to estimate the impact of patient and clinical characteristics on costs.

RESULTS

Among 501,216 patients with newly diagnosed VTE, 4,995 (1%) received an IVCF placement; of these, 1,215 (24.3%) had a retrieval procedure. Beneficiaries with IVCF placements and retrievals differed from a demographic and clinical perspective than from those without. Costs varied by the site of service, VTE acuity, and VTE type. Cost influencers included age, race, census region, service location, and VTE type.

CONCLUSIONS

IVCF placement costs were driven by baseline patient characteristics (age, race, geographic residence, acute VTE diagnosis, and inpatient site of service), whereas retrieval costs were driven by age and deep vein thrombosis diagnosis. Strategies to mitigate the retrieval costs or the need to retrieve IVCFs may reduce the overall cost burden of IVCFs.

Inferior Vena Cava Filter Evaluation and Management for the Diagnostic Radiologist: A Comprehensive Review Including Inferior Vena Cava Filter-Related Complications and PRESERVE Trial Filters

Inferior vena cava filters are commonly encountered devices on diagnostic imaging that were highlighted in a 2010 Food and Drug Administration safety advisory regarding their complications from long-term implantation. The Predicting the Safety and Effectiveness of Inferior Vena Cava Filters (PRESERVE) trial is an ongoing after-market study investigating the safety and utility of commonly utilized filters in practice today. While most of these filters are safe, prompt recognition and management of any filter-associated complication is imperative to prevent or reduce the morbidity and mortality associated with them. This review is aimed at discussing the appropriate utilization and placement of inferior vena cava filters in addition to the recognition of filter-associated complications on cross-sectional imaging. An overview of the PRESRVE trial filters is also provided to understand each filter's propensity for specific complications.

Safety of retrievable inferior vena cava filters in patients with the antiphospholipid syndrome

OBJECTIVE

Consideration for placement of an inferior cava filter arises in patients with APS where cessation of anticoagulation is necessary or thrombotic complications continue despite maximal anticoagulation. Permanent IVC filters are recommended to be avoided. We evaluated the safety of placement and removal of retrievable inferior vena cava filters in patients with APS.

METHODS

Case series of 5 patients with APS and aPL antibodies who had placement and removal of retrievable IVC filter (because of contraindication to anticoagulation or ongoing thrombosis despite full anticoagulation) to assess for safety, presence of clots in the vena cava or on the filter while in the body, evidence of PE, or clot on the explanted filter.

RESULTS

Insertion and removal, even while on anticoagulation, was safe. There was no evidence of clot in the vena cava, on the filter or pulmonary embolism in all cases.

CONCLUSION

Where necessary, retrievable IVC filters may be safer in APS patients but should not be left in for long periods of time.

Diagnosis and Management of Spontaneous Lumbar Venous Retroperitoneal Hematoma in Setting of Deep Venous Thrombosis: A Case Report and Algorithm

Retroperitoneal hematoma is rare and benefits from a systematic approach to prevent morbidity and mortality. Management of such bleeds is based upon patient stability, the cause (spontaneous or posttraumatic), and source (arterial or venous). Herein, the authors describe a diagnostic and management algorithm for retroperitoneal hemorrhage with an example of a rare lumbar venous bleed under the complicated clinical setting of deep venous thrombosis.

Retrievable inferior vena cava filters can always be removed using "fall-back" techniques

OBJECTIVE

Retrievable inferior vena cava filters (IVCFs) left in place for a prolonged period can lead to complications including filter migration, fracture, and caval thrombosis. "Fall-back" techniques for IVCF retrieval that can be used when standard snaring is unsuccessful have been recently described. The purpose of this study was to analyze how incorporation of these new techniques affected the outcomes of IVCF retrievals at our institution during the past 5 years.

METHODS

Data were collected of all patients undergoing IVCF removal by vascular surgeons at a tertiary academic medical center between 2009 and 2013, including demographics and procedural and filter characteristics. A standard technique of snaring the retrieval hook was attempted first in all cases; if this was unsuccessful, a number of fall-back techniques were employed, including the use of endoscopic graspers, 18F sheaths, and snaring a second wire below the collar of the filter to collapse it into the sheath.

RESULTS

IVCF retrieval was attempted in 275 patients; 3 were excluded intraoperatively because of thrombus in the filter. Most filters (97%) were Günther Tulips (Cook Medical, Bloomington, Ind); 70% had been placed prophylactically before bariatric surgery. A total of 268 filters (98.5%) were retrieved successfully, 213 (79%) by standard snaring and 55 (21%) with fall-back techniques. In patients undergoing fall-back techniques, technical success was achieved 100% of the time. The median time since insertion was significantly longer in the fall-back group (173 days vs 83 days; P < .0001). Four intraoperative complications occurred; fractured wires embolized to the right atrium or pulmonary artery and were successfully removed endovascularly. The majority of the procedures (80%) were performed under sedation in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Incorporation of fall-back techniques may allow 100% technically successful and safe removal of retrievable IVCFs and is especially useful in removing filters with prolonged dwell time.

Efficacy of Retrievable Inferior Vena Cava Filter Placement in the Prevention of Pulmonary Embolism during Catheter-Directed Thrombectomy for Proximal Lower-Extremity Deep Vein Thrombosis

BACKGROUND

Inferior vena cava (IVC) filter placement is not indicated for thrombolytic interventional treatment for deep vein thrombosis (DVT). We analyzed the efficacy and feasibility of retrievable IVC filter placement for the preventive management of embolic shedding during catheter-directed thrombectomy (CDT) for DVT of lower extremity.

METHODS

Seventy patients (35 males and 35 females) who underwent retrievable IVC filter placement to prevent thrombus dislodgement during CDT in all symptomatic DVT with thrombus age suspected within 4 weeks of the lower extremity between March 2008 and January 2014 were included in this study. All patients underwent laboratory blood study, duplex ultrasound and/or computed tomography for diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up in accordance with treatment policy of our Uijeongbu St. Mary's hospital. Two types of retrievable IVC filters (OptEase Filter, Cordis, Roden, The Netherlands; Gunther Tulip Filter, Cook, Bloomington, IN) were used to prevent thromboembolic events during CDT. After filter placement, subcutaneous low-molecular-weight heparin and overlapped to warfarin or new oral anticoagulant tried to achieve a target international normalized ratio (INR) of 2.0-3.0 in warfarin patients.

RESULTS

The thrombus was dislodged through the IVC filter during catheter-directed thrombolytic therapy in 22 patients (31.4%). In 22 cases, the thromboses were trapped by the retrievable IVC filter, and follow-up images showed thrombus capture. Thirty-four patients (48.6%) received percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA). Additional stents were inserted in 23 patients (32.8%). Pulmonary embolism (PE) was not observed in patients implanted with retrievable IVC filters.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study findings suggest that retrieval IVC filter placement during interventional treatments of DVT of lower extremity such as thrombectomy of vein thrombus with or without stent insertion at compressed deep vein is favorable and effective for protecting against PE or lethal complications. We recommend carefully that before the management of DVT thrombus of lower extremity, retrieval IVC filter placement should be considered for preventing morbidity related with the PE.

Inferior Vena Cava Filters: Indications, Outcomes, and Evidence

OPINION STATEMENT

Filter technology seems relatively stable, although absorbable devices are an area of investigational interest. The indications for filter placement remain controversial, with wide variations in adherence to guidelines, and relatively poor quality of data about the specific prophylactic indications of trauma or bariatric surgery. The outcomes of filters are not well-defined despite widespread clinical use, and good data remains difficult to obtain. Several larger database and institutional retrospective studies support the notions that while filters prevent pulmonary embolism, they may be associated with venous thrombotic complications. Some subsets of cancer patients may be at increased risk of these complications, but whether the filter or the underlying hypercoagulable state is the cause is not clear. Lastly, although the benefits of filter retrieval are widely assumed (but not proven), filter retrieval rates remain lower than expected. The single most influential factor in improving filter retrieval rates is dedicated follow-up with intent to retrieve the filter.

Infusion of iodine-based contrast agents into poly(p-dioxanone) as a radiopaque resorbable IVC filter

To determine the feasibility of infusing resorbable inferior vena cava (IVC) filter with iodine-based contrast agents to produce a radiopaque, computed tomography (CT)-visible IVC filter. Infused poly(p-dioxanone) (PPDO) was obtained by incubating PPDO in different concentrations of 4-iodobenzoyl chloride (IBC) and 2,3,5-triiodobenzoic acid (TIBA). Characterizations of infused and nascent PPDO were done using elemental analysis, micro-CT, tensile strength analysis, scanning electron microscopy, and differential scanning calorimetry. Elemental analysis showed percentage loading of 1.07 ± 0.08 for IBC and 0.73 ± 0.01 for TIBA. The iodine loading remained the same within 2 weeks for TIBA but decreased to about 80 % with IBC when subjected to physiological conditions. Micro-CT images showed increased attenuation of the infused PPDO compared with the nascent PPDO. The Hounsfield unit values for infused and nascent sutures were 110 ± 40 and 153 ± 53 for PPDO infused with 2 mg/mL IBC and TIBA, respectively, but only 11.35 ± 2 for nascent PPDO. In contrast the HU for bone was 116 ± 37. Tensile strength analysis showed maximum loads of 1.01 ± 0.43 kg and 10.02 ± 0.54 kg for IBC and TIBA, respectively, and 10.10 ± 0.64 kg for nascent PPDO. Scanning electron microscopy showed that the morphology of the PPDO surface did not change after coating and preliminary cytotoxicity assay showed no killing effect on Hela cells. PPDO infused with a contrast agent is significantly more radiopaque than nascent PPDO on micro-CT imaging. This radiopacity could allow the position and integrity of infused resorbable IVC filter to be monitored while it is in place, thus increasing its safety and efficacy as a medical device.