Vena cava filters: Uses and abuses

John E. Rectenwald

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

31 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Currently, there are more than 10 permanent and optional retrievable vena cava filters in use in North America and Europe. Indications for inferior vena cava (IVC) filter placement are intuitive and filters are used in patients who have deep venous thrombosis (DVT) and contraindications to anticoagulation, or in patients who hemorrhage while anticoagulated for DVT. Multiple studies have proposed broadening the use of IVC filters as primary venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis in certain patient populations. Many permanent IVC filters have been well studied and have superior performance characteristics. On the other hand, optional retrievable IVC filters are attractive in the patient with a well-defined, short-term risk for VTE and contraindications to anticoagulation. Filter retrieval after the patient can be anticoagulated would eliminate the long-term risk of DVT associated with permanent IVC filter placement. Unfortunately, most optional retrievable filters are relatively new and have little to no data on their long-term performance when used as permanent filters, and the percentage of retrievable filters actually removed is less than 50%. The spirited debate concerning which patient should get which filter is just beginning. More prospective, randomized trials evaluating optional retrievable filters are needed to answer these important questions.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)166-175
Number of pages10
JournalSeminars in Vascular Surgery
Volume18
Issue number3 SPEC. ISS.
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 1 2005

Fingerprint

Vena Cava Filters
Venous Thrombosis
Venous Thromboembolism
North America
Hemorrhage
Population

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Cite this

Vena cava filters : Uses and abuses. / Rectenwald, John E.

In: Seminars in Vascular Surgery, Vol. 18, No. 3 SPEC. ISS., 01.09.2005, p. 166-175.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

Rectenwald, John E. / Vena cava filters : Uses and abuses. In: Seminars in Vascular Surgery. 2005 ; Vol. 18, No. 3 SPEC. ISS. pp. 166-175.
@article{0533c14f2fc04606b2d9bcf9867cdd2a,
title = "Vena cava filters: Uses and abuses",
abstract = "Currently, there are more than 10 permanent and optional retrievable vena cava filters in use in North America and Europe. Indications for inferior vena cava (IVC) filter placement are intuitive and filters are used in patients who have deep venous thrombosis (DVT) and contraindications to anticoagulation, or in patients who hemorrhage while anticoagulated for DVT. Multiple studies have proposed broadening the use of IVC filters as primary venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis in certain patient populations. Many permanent IVC filters have been well studied and have superior performance characteristics. On the other hand, optional retrievable IVC filters are attractive in the patient with a well-defined, short-term risk for VTE and contraindications to anticoagulation. Filter retrieval after the patient can be anticoagulated would eliminate the long-term risk of DVT associated with permanent IVC filter placement. Unfortunately, most optional retrievable filters are relatively new and have little to no data on their long-term performance when used as permanent filters, and the percentage of retrievable filters actually removed is less than 50{\%}. The spirited debate concerning which patient should get which filter is just beginning. More prospective, randomized trials evaluating optional retrievable filters are needed to answer these important questions.",
author = "Rectenwald, {John E.}",
year = "2005",
month = "9",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1053/j.semvascsurg.2005.05.009",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "18",
pages = "166--175",
journal = "Seminars in Vascular Surgery",
issn = "0895-7967",
publisher = "W.B. Saunders Ltd",
number = "3 SPEC. ISS.",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Vena cava filters

T2 - Uses and abuses

AU - Rectenwald, John E.

PY - 2005/9/1

Y1 - 2005/9/1

N2 - Currently, there are more than 10 permanent and optional retrievable vena cava filters in use in North America and Europe. Indications for inferior vena cava (IVC) filter placement are intuitive and filters are used in patients who have deep venous thrombosis (DVT) and contraindications to anticoagulation, or in patients who hemorrhage while anticoagulated for DVT. Multiple studies have proposed broadening the use of IVC filters as primary venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis in certain patient populations. Many permanent IVC filters have been well studied and have superior performance characteristics. On the other hand, optional retrievable IVC filters are attractive in the patient with a well-defined, short-term risk for VTE and contraindications to anticoagulation. Filter retrieval after the patient can be anticoagulated would eliminate the long-term risk of DVT associated with permanent IVC filter placement. Unfortunately, most optional retrievable filters are relatively new and have little to no data on their long-term performance when used as permanent filters, and the percentage of retrievable filters actually removed is less than 50%. The spirited debate concerning which patient should get which filter is just beginning. More prospective, randomized trials evaluating optional retrievable filters are needed to answer these important questions.

AB - Currently, there are more than 10 permanent and optional retrievable vena cava filters in use in North America and Europe. Indications for inferior vena cava (IVC) filter placement are intuitive and filters are used in patients who have deep venous thrombosis (DVT) and contraindications to anticoagulation, or in patients who hemorrhage while anticoagulated for DVT. Multiple studies have proposed broadening the use of IVC filters as primary venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis in certain patient populations. Many permanent IVC filters have been well studied and have superior performance characteristics. On the other hand, optional retrievable IVC filters are attractive in the patient with a well-defined, short-term risk for VTE and contraindications to anticoagulation. Filter retrieval after the patient can be anticoagulated would eliminate the long-term risk of DVT associated with permanent IVC filter placement. Unfortunately, most optional retrievable filters are relatively new and have little to no data on their long-term performance when used as permanent filters, and the percentage of retrievable filters actually removed is less than 50%. The spirited debate concerning which patient should get which filter is just beginning. More prospective, randomized trials evaluating optional retrievable filters are needed to answer these important questions.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=24944542339&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=24944542339&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1053/j.semvascsurg.2005.05.009

DO - 10.1053/j.semvascsurg.2005.05.009

M3 - Review article

C2 - 16168893

AN - SCOPUS:24944542339

VL - 18

SP - 166

EP - 175

JO - Seminars in Vascular Surgery

JF - Seminars in Vascular Surgery

SN - 0895-7967

IS - 3 SPEC. ISS.

ER -