Current practice of temporary vena cava filter insertion: a multicenter registry.

作者信息

Lorch H, Welger D, Wagner V, Hillner B, Strecker E P, Herrmann H, Voshage G, Zur C, Schwarzbach C, Schröder J, Gullotta U, Pleissner J, Huttner S, Siering U, Märcklin C, Chavan A, Gläser F, Apitzsch D E, Moubayed K, Leonhardi J, Schuchard U M, Weiss H D, Zwaan M

机构信息

Department of Radiology, Medical University of Luebeck, Lübeck, Germany.

出版信息

J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2000 Jan;11(1):83-8. doi: 10.1016/s1051-0443(07)61287-1.

DOI:10.1016/s1051-0443(07)61287-1

PMID:10693718

Abstract

PURPOSE

To evaluate the current practice of temporary vena cava filter placement and its complications.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A multicenter registry was conducted from May 1995 until May 1997 using a standardized questionnaire. One hundred eighty-eight patients were evaluated. Patient characteristics, filter indications, filter characteristics, and complications were registered.

RESULTS

Deep vein thrombosis was proven in 95.2% of the patients. Main filter indication was thrombolysis therapy (53.1%). Average filter time was 5.4 days. An Antheor filter was inserted in 56.4%, a Guenther filter in 26.6%, and a Prolyser filter in 17.%. Transfemoral filter implantation was slightly preferred (54.8%). Four patients died of pulmonary embolism (PE) during filter protection. Major filter problems were filter thrombosis (16%) and filter dislocation (4.8%). When thrombus was found in or at the filter before explantation, additional thrombolysis was performed in 16.7%, additional filter implantation in 10%, and thrombus aspiration in 6.7%; 4.8% of filters were replaced with permanent filters.

DISCUSSION

Temporary vena cava filters are placed to prevent PE in a defined patient population. Despite their presence, PEs still occur in a small percentage. Problems of filter thrombosis and dislocation have to be solved.