Purpose: To assess the long-term safety and effectiveness of the OptEase inferior vena cava (IVC) filter. Materials and Methods: In this Institutional Review Board-approved, retrospective study, we reviewed data of 71 patients who received an OptEase filter at our institution from 2002 to 2007. Thirty-nine (55%) patients had symptoms of venous thromboembolism before filter placement. The indications for filter included contraindication to anticoagulation in 31 (44%) patients, prophylaxis against pulmonary embolism (PE) in 29 (41%) patients, and failure of anticoagulation in 11 (15%) patients. Procedure-related complications, such as symptomatic post-filter PE, deep venous thrombosis (DVT), IVC occlusion, and incidental imaging-evident filter-related complications, were recorded. Safety was assessed by the occurrence of filter-related complications during placement and follow-up. Effectiveness was assessed by the occurrence of post-filter PE. Results: Sixty-five (92%) filters were placed under fluoroscopy, and 6 (8%) were placed using intravascular ultrasound guidance. Seventy (99%) filters were placed successfully. Seven (10%) filters were placed in the suprarenal cava. Retrieval was attempted in 14 (20%) patients, and 12 filters were successfully retrieved. Clinical follow-up was available for 20 ± 21 months. Symptoms of postfilter PE and DVT occurred in 15% (n = 11) and 10% (n = 7) patients, respectively. None of these patients had computed tomography (CT)-proven PE, and only one had ultrasound-proven new DVT. One patient had symptomatic IVC occlusion. Follow-up abdominal CT in 20 patients showed thrombus in the filter in two of them. There were no instances of filter migration, filter tilt, or caval wall penetration. Conclusion: The OptEase filter appears to have an acceptable long-term safety profile. The filter was effective against PE.
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging
- Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine