Should We Remove the Retrievable Cook Celect Inferior Vena Cava Filter? Eight Years of Experience at a Single Center
The Korean Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery
;
: 443-447, 2017.
Article
in English
| WPRIM
| ID: wpr-175187
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND:
The inferior vena cava filter (IVCF) is very effective for preventing pulmonary embolism in patients who cannot undergo anticoagulation therapy. However, if a filter is placed in the body permanently, it may lead to other complications.METHODS:
A retrospective study was performed of 159 patients who underwent retrievable Cook Celect IVCF implantation between January 2007 and April 2015 at a single center. Baseline characteristics, indications, and complications caused by the filter were investigated.RESULTS:
The most common underlying disease of patients receiving the filter was cancer (24.3%). Venous thrombolysis or thrombectomy was the most common indication for IVCF insertion in this study (47.2%). The most common complication was inferior vena cava penetration, the risk of which increased the longer the filter remained in the body (p=0.032, Exp(B)=1.004).CONCLUSION:
If the patient is able to retry anticoagulation therapy and the filter is no longer needed, the filter should be removed, even if a long time has elapsed since implantation. If the filter cannot be removed, it is recommended that follow-up computed tomography be performed regularly to monitor the progress of venous thromboembolisms as well as any filter-related complications.
Full text:
Available
Index:
WPRIM (Western Pacific)
Main subject:
Pulmonary Embolism
/
Thromboembolism
/
Vena Cava, Inferior
/
Retrospective Studies
/
Follow-Up Studies
/
Vena Cava Filters
/
Thrombectomy
/
Venous Thrombosis
Type of study:
Observational study
/
Prognostic study
/
Risk factors
Limits:
Humans
Language:
English
Journal:
The Korean Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery
Year:
2017
Type:
Article
Similar
MEDLINE
...
LILACS
LIS