Inferior vena cava filters in cancer patients: Indications and outcome

R. E. Schwarz, A. M. Marrero, K. C. Conlon, M. Burt

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

85 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: Our experience with inferior vena cava (IVC) filter placement to prevent pulmonary emboli (PE) in cancer patients with deep vein thromboses (DVT) was reviewed to identify indications, patient characteristics, complications, and long-term outcome. Methods: Charts of 182 patients with cancer were retrospectively analyzed. All patients had received an IVC filter in our institution between January 1980 and April 1992. Results: Of 182 patients, 103 were men and 79 were women. Median age was 59 years (range, 15 to 88). Eight patients (4%) had stage I disease, 22 patients (12%) stage II, 37 patients (20%) stage III, and 115 patients (63%) stage IV. A DVT was diagnosed in 97 patients (53%), a PE in 46 patients (25%), and a combination in 39 patients (21%). Indications for IVC filter placement were DVT or PE in the presence of contraindications to anticoagulation therapy (perioperative, n = 58; CNS metastases, n = 20; thrombocytopenia, n = 7; bleeding, n = 61; others, n = 24; total, N = 170) or anticoagulation failure (recurrent PE, n = 6; recurrent DVT; n = 6; total N = 12). Filter placement complications (n = 6, 3%) included malposition (n = 3), migration (n = 1), arrhythmia (n = 1), and wound infection (n = 1), but no deaths. After filter placement, four patients developed a recurrent PE, and 11 patients developed a recurrent DVT. No significant postthrombotic complications were observed. Conclusion: IVC filter placement patients with advanced cancer and thrombotic complications is safe, well tolerated, and can offer effective therapy/prophylaxis with a low incidence of treatment failure.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)652-657
Number of pages6
JournalJournal of Clinical Oncology
Volume14
Issue number2
StatePublished - Feb 1996

Fingerprint

Vena Cava Filters
Neoplasms
Embolism
Venous Thrombosis
Lung
Wound Infection

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cancer Research
  • Oncology

Cite this

Schwarz, R. E., Marrero, A. M., Conlon, K. C., & Burt, M. (1996). Inferior vena cava filters in cancer patients: Indications and outcome. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 14(2), 652-657.

Inferior vena cava filters in cancer patients : Indications and outcome. / Schwarz, R. E.; Marrero, A. M.; Conlon, K. C.; Burt, M.

In: Journal of Clinical Oncology, Vol. 14, No. 2, 02.1996, p. 652-657.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Schwarz, RE, Marrero, AM, Conlon, KC & Burt, M 1996, 'Inferior vena cava filters in cancer patients: Indications and outcome', Journal of Clinical Oncology, vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 652-657.
Schwarz RE, Marrero AM, Conlon KC, Burt M. Inferior vena cava filters in cancer patients: Indications and outcome. Journal of Clinical Oncology. 1996 Feb;14(2):652-657.
Schwarz, R. E. ; Marrero, A. M. ; Conlon, K. C. ; Burt, M. / Inferior vena cava filters in cancer patients : Indications and outcome. In: Journal of Clinical Oncology. 1996 ; Vol. 14, No. 2. pp. 652-657.
@article{ae75d8cc86604949a7ce990a7f5079d5,
title = "Inferior vena cava filters in cancer patients: Indications and outcome",
abstract = "Purpose: Our experience with inferior vena cava (IVC) filter placement to prevent pulmonary emboli (PE) in cancer patients with deep vein thromboses (DVT) was reviewed to identify indications, patient characteristics, complications, and long-term outcome. Methods: Charts of 182 patients with cancer were retrospectively analyzed. All patients had received an IVC filter in our institution between January 1980 and April 1992. Results: Of 182 patients, 103 were men and 79 were women. Median age was 59 years (range, 15 to 88). Eight patients (4{\%}) had stage I disease, 22 patients (12{\%}) stage II, 37 patients (20{\%}) stage III, and 115 patients (63{\%}) stage IV. A DVT was diagnosed in 97 patients (53{\%}), a PE in 46 patients (25{\%}), and a combination in 39 patients (21{\%}). Indications for IVC filter placement were DVT or PE in the presence of contraindications to anticoagulation therapy (perioperative, n = 58; CNS metastases, n = 20; thrombocytopenia, n = 7; bleeding, n = 61; others, n = 24; total, N = 170) or anticoagulation failure (recurrent PE, n = 6; recurrent DVT; n = 6; total N = 12). Filter placement complications (n = 6, 3{\%}) included malposition (n = 3), migration (n = 1), arrhythmia (n = 1), and wound infection (n = 1), but no deaths. After filter placement, four patients developed a recurrent PE, and 11 patients developed a recurrent DVT. No significant postthrombotic complications were observed. Conclusion: IVC filter placement patients with advanced cancer and thrombotic complications is safe, well tolerated, and can offer effective therapy/prophylaxis with a low incidence of treatment failure.",
author = "Schwarz, {R. E.} and Marrero, {A. M.} and Conlon, {K. C.} and M. Burt",
year = "1996",
month = "2",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "14",
pages = "652--657",
journal = "Journal of Clinical Oncology",
issn = "0732-183X",
publisher = "American Society of Clinical Oncology",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Inferior vena cava filters in cancer patients

T2 - Indications and outcome

AU - Schwarz, R. E.

AU - Marrero, A. M.

AU - Conlon, K. C.

AU - Burt, M.

PY - 1996/2

Y1 - 1996/2

N2 - Purpose: Our experience with inferior vena cava (IVC) filter placement to prevent pulmonary emboli (PE) in cancer patients with deep vein thromboses (DVT) was reviewed to identify indications, patient characteristics, complications, and long-term outcome. Methods: Charts of 182 patients with cancer were retrospectively analyzed. All patients had received an IVC filter in our institution between January 1980 and April 1992. Results: Of 182 patients, 103 were men and 79 were women. Median age was 59 years (range, 15 to 88). Eight patients (4%) had stage I disease, 22 patients (12%) stage II, 37 patients (20%) stage III, and 115 patients (63%) stage IV. A DVT was diagnosed in 97 patients (53%), a PE in 46 patients (25%), and a combination in 39 patients (21%). Indications for IVC filter placement were DVT or PE in the presence of contraindications to anticoagulation therapy (perioperative, n = 58; CNS metastases, n = 20; thrombocytopenia, n = 7; bleeding, n = 61; others, n = 24; total, N = 170) or anticoagulation failure (recurrent PE, n = 6; recurrent DVT; n = 6; total N = 12). Filter placement complications (n = 6, 3%) included malposition (n = 3), migration (n = 1), arrhythmia (n = 1), and wound infection (n = 1), but no deaths. After filter placement, four patients developed a recurrent PE, and 11 patients developed a recurrent DVT. No significant postthrombotic complications were observed. Conclusion: IVC filter placement patients with advanced cancer and thrombotic complications is safe, well tolerated, and can offer effective therapy/prophylaxis with a low incidence of treatment failure.

AB - Purpose: Our experience with inferior vena cava (IVC) filter placement to prevent pulmonary emboli (PE) in cancer patients with deep vein thromboses (DVT) was reviewed to identify indications, patient characteristics, complications, and long-term outcome. Methods: Charts of 182 patients with cancer were retrospectively analyzed. All patients had received an IVC filter in our institution between January 1980 and April 1992. Results: Of 182 patients, 103 were men and 79 were women. Median age was 59 years (range, 15 to 88). Eight patients (4%) had stage I disease, 22 patients (12%) stage II, 37 patients (20%) stage III, and 115 patients (63%) stage IV. A DVT was diagnosed in 97 patients (53%), a PE in 46 patients (25%), and a combination in 39 patients (21%). Indications for IVC filter placement were DVT or PE in the presence of contraindications to anticoagulation therapy (perioperative, n = 58; CNS metastases, n = 20; thrombocytopenia, n = 7; bleeding, n = 61; others, n = 24; total, N = 170) or anticoagulation failure (recurrent PE, n = 6; recurrent DVT; n = 6; total N = 12). Filter placement complications (n = 6, 3%) included malposition (n = 3), migration (n = 1), arrhythmia (n = 1), and wound infection (n = 1), but no deaths. After filter placement, four patients developed a recurrent PE, and 11 patients developed a recurrent DVT. No significant postthrombotic complications were observed. Conclusion: IVC filter placement patients with advanced cancer and thrombotic complications is safe, well tolerated, and can offer effective therapy/prophylaxis with a low incidence of treatment failure.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0030045575&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0030045575&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 8636783

AN - SCOPUS:0030045575

VL - 14

SP - 652

EP - 657

JO - Journal of Clinical Oncology

JF - Journal of Clinical Oncology

SN - 0732-183X

IS - 2

ER -