Park Byung Geon, Seo Anna, Lee Sang Yub, Cha Jung Guen, Hong Jihoon, Lee Hoseok, Heo Jun, Do Young Woo
Department of Radiology, Kyungpook National University Hospital, Daegu, Republic of Korea.
Lee Gil Ya Cancer and Diabetes Institute, Gachon University of Medicine and Science, Incheon, Republic of Korea.
Eur J Radiol Open. 2020 Mar 21;7:100227. doi: 10.1016/j.ejro.2020.100227. eCollection 2020.
To compare filter tilt and filter jumping during Option inferior vena cava (IVC) filter deployment with 3 different wires techniques using a 3-dimensional (3D) printing vena cava phantom.
An IVC 3D printed vena cava phantom was made from a healthy young male's computed tomographic data. Option IVC filters were deployed with 3 different wires: i) original push wire, ii) hydrophilic stiff wire, and iii) bent stiff wire. Right internal jugular and right femoral access were used 5 times with each wire. Filter tilt angle, tilt ratio, jumping, and tip abutment to the IVC wall were analyzed.
The transfemoral approach with original push wire had significantly higher tilt angle than did the transjugular approach (6.1˚ ± 1.9 vs. 3.5˚ ± 1.3, = 0.04). Mean tilt ratio was significantly lower with the bent wire with transfemoral access (0.49 ± 0.13 vs. 0.78 ± 0.18 [original push-wire] and 0.67 ± 0.08 [stiff wire], = 0.019). The ratio was lower also with original push wire with transjugular access (0.34 ± 0.19 vs. 0.57 ±0.11 [stiff wire] and 0.58 ±0.17 [bent wire], = 0.045). Filter jumping occurred more often with the transjugular approach with original push wire than with stiff or bent-wire delivery. Filter tip abutment to the IVC wall occurred only with the transfemoral approach.
Bent wire with transfemoral access and original push wire with transjugular access had lower filter tilt ratio at Option IVC filter deployment. However, filter jumping was common using the original push wire with transjugular access.
使用三维（3D）打印的腔静脉模型，比较采用三种不同导丝技术在置入Option下腔静脉（IVC）滤器过程中的滤器倾斜和滤器移位情况。
根据一名健康年轻男性的计算机断层扫描数据制作IVC 3D打印腔静脉模型。使用三种不同的导丝置入Option IVC滤器：i）原装推送导丝，ii）亲水硬导丝，iii）弯曲硬导丝。每种导丝均经右颈内静脉和右股静脉入路各使用5次。分析滤器倾斜角度、倾斜率、移位情况以及滤器尖端与IVC壁的贴合情况。
使用原装推送导丝经股静脉入路的倾斜角度显著高于经颈静脉入路（6.1˚±1.9 vs. 3.5˚±1.3，P = 0.04）。经股静脉入路使用弯曲导丝时的平均倾斜率显著更低（0.49±0.13 vs. 0.78±0.18 [原装推送导丝]和0.67±0.08 [硬导丝]，P = 0.019）。经颈静脉入路使用原装推送导丝时该比率也更低（0.34±0.19 vs. 0.57±0.11 [硬导丝]和0.58±0.17 [弯曲导丝]，P = 0.045）。与使用硬导丝或弯曲导丝输送相比，使用原装推送导丝经颈静脉入路时滤器移位更常发生。滤器尖端与IVC壁的贴合仅出现在经股静脉入路时。
在置入Option IVC滤器时，经股静脉入路使用弯曲导丝和经颈静脉入路使用原装推送导丝的滤器倾斜率更低。然而，经颈静脉入路使用原装推送导丝时滤器移位很常见。
