Practice patterns and outcomes of retrievable vena cava filters in trauma patients: an AAST multicenter study.

نویسندگان

  • Riyad Karmy-Jones
  • Gregory J Jurkovich
  • George C Velmahos
  • Thomas Burdick
  • Konstantinos Spaniolas
  • Samuel R Todd
  • Michael McNally
  • Robert C Jacoby
  • Daniel Link
  • Randy J Janczyk
  • Felicia A Ivascu
  • Michael McCann
  • Farouck Obeid
  • William S Hoff
  • Nathaniel McQuay
  • Brandon H Tieu
  • Martin A Schreiber
  • Ram Nirula
  • Karen Brasel
  • Julie A Dunn
  • Debbie Gambrell
  • Roger Huckfeldt
  • Jayna Harper
  • Kathryn B Schaffer
  • Gail T Tominaga
  • Fausto Y Vinces
  • David Sperling
  • David Hoyt
  • Raul Coimbra
  • Mathew R Rosengart
  • Raquel Forsythe
  • Clay Cothren
  • Ernest E Moore
  • Elliott R Haut
  • Awori J Hayanga
  • Linda Hird
  • Christopher White
  • Jodi Grossman
  • Kimberly Nagy
  • West Livaudais
  • Rhonda Wood
  • Imme Zengerink
  • John B Kortbeek
چکیده

BACKGROUND The purpose of this study is to describe practice patterns and outcomes of posttraumatic retrievable inferior vena caval filters (R-IVCF). METHODS A retrospective review of R-IVCFs placed during 2004 at 21 participating centers with follow up to July 1, 2005 was performed. Primary outcomes included major complications (migration, pulmonary embolism [PE], and symptomatic caval occlusion) and reasons for failure to retrieve. RESULTS Of 446 patients (69% male, 92% blunt trauma) receiving R-IVCFs, 76% for prophylactic indications and 79% were placed by interventional radiology. Excluding 33 deaths, 152 were Gunter-Tulip (G-T), 224 Recovery (R), and 37 Optease (Opt). Placement occurred 6 +/- 8 days after admission and retrieval at 50 +/- 61 days. Follow up after discharge (5.7 +/- 4.3 months) was reported in 51%. Only 22% of R-IVCFs were retrieved. Of 115 patients in whom retrieval was attempted, retrieval failed as a result of technical issues in 15 patients (10% of G-T, 14% of R, 27% of Opt) and because of significant residual thrombus within the filter in 10 patients (6% of G-T, 4% of R, 46% Opt). The primary reason R-IVCFs were not removed was because of loss to follow up (31%), which was sixfold higher (6% to 44%, p = 0.001) when the service placing the R-IVCF was not directly responsible for follow up. Complications did not correlate with mechanism, injury severity, service placing the R-IVCF, trauma volume, use of anticoagulation, age, or sex. Three cases of migration were recorded (all among R, 1.3%), two breakthrough PE (G-T 0.6% and R 0.4%) and six symptomatic caval occlusions (G-T 0, R 1%, Opt 11%) (p < 0.05 Opt versus both G-T and R). CONCLUSION Most R-IVCFs are not retrieved. The service placing the R-IVCF should be responsible for follow up. The Optease was associated with the greatest incidence of residual thrombus and symptomatic caval occlusion. The practice patterns of R-IVCF placement and retrieval should be re-examined.

برای دانلود متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید

ثبت نام

اگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید

منابع مشابه

The use of retrievable inferior vena cava filters in orthopaedic patients.

This study was undertaken to evaluate the safety and efficacy of retrievable inferior vena cava filters in high-risk orthopaedic patients. A total of 58 patients had a retrievable inferior vena cava filter placed as an adjunct to chemical and mechanical prophylaxis, most commonly for a history of previous deep-vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism, polytrauma, or expected prolonged immobilisati...

متن کامل

Indications, complications, and management of inferior vena cava filters: the experience in 952 patients at an academic hospital with a level I trauma center.

IMPORTANCE Retrievable inferior vena cava (IVC) filters were designed to provide temporary protection from pulmonary embolism, sparing patients from long-term complications of permanent filters. However, many retrievable IVC filters are left in place indefinitely. OBJECTIVES To review the medical records of patients with IVC filters to determine patient demographics and date of and indication...

متن کامل

Venous thrombotic, thromboembolic, and mechanical complications after retrievable inferior vena cava filters for major trauma.

BACKGROUND The ideal thromboprophylaxis in patients at risk of bleeding is uncertain. This retrospective cohort study assessed the risk factors for complications after using retrievable inferior vena cava (IVC) filters for primary or secondary thromboembolism prophylaxis in patients after major trauma. METHODS Using data from radiology, trauma and death registries, the incidence of and risk f...

متن کامل

Vena cava filters: a decade of experience in a level I trauma center.

OBJECTIVE To evaluate the data on the use of vena cava filter in the Division of Trauma, UCSD Medical Center - San Diego, CA / USA. METHODS A descriptive study was conducted at the Division of Trauma to evaluate the cumulated experience and the therapeutic approach in patients attended by the staff of the Division of Trauma and submitted to placement of a vena cava filter as a method of preve...

متن کامل

Detailed assessment of benefits and risks of retrievable inferior vena cava filters on patients with complicated injuries: the da Vinci multicentre randomised controlled trial study protocol

INTRODUCTION Retrievable inferior vena cava (IVC) filters have been increasingly used in patients with major trauma who have contraindications to anticoagulant prophylaxis as a primary prophylactic measure against venous thromboembolism (VTE). The benefits, risks and cost-effectiveness of such strategy are uncertain. METHODS AND ANALYSIS Patients with major trauma, defined by an estimated Inj...

متن کامل

ذخیره در منابع من


  با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید

برای دانلود متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید

ثبت نام

اگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید

عنوان ژورنال:
  • The Journal of trauma

دوره 62 1  شماره 

صفحات  -

تاریخ انتشار 2007