OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to assess the retrieval rate and the predictors of successful retrieval of Retrievable Inferior Vena Cava (RIVC) filters. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of adult patients who had RIVC filter placements from 2004-2008. We excluded patients who died or were lost to follow-up and those who refused or had unsuccessful retrieval. We collected demographic and clinical data including indications for placement and follow-up. Successful retrieval was defined as objective evidence of retrieval by medical records. RESULTS: Over a 4 year period, we identified 351 patients who had RIVC filter placements. We excluded 99 patients (65 died, 24 decided to leave filter in place, 7 had unsuccessful retrieval and 3 lost follow-up). Majority of the filters were placed for surgical patients (161, 63.9%). Of 252 eligible patients for retrieval, only 47 filters were successfully retrieved yielding a retrieval rate of 18.7%. We identified three predictors for successful retrieval: Male gender, home discharge and follow up with procedural service. CONCLUSION: In this large cohort we found that the retrieval rate of retrievable IVCF is extremely low consistent with national statistics. Male patients, patients who were discharged home and patients who were followed by the procedural service had higher chance of successful retrieval. We recommend that procedural service placing the filter should ascertain adequate follow-up. We are not certain why more males had successful retrieval than females. Further studies are necessary to investigate this finding.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to assess the retrieval rate and the predictors of successful retrieval of Retrievable Inferior Vena Cava (RIVC) filters. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of adult patients who had RIVC filter placements from 2004-2008. We excluded patients who died or were lost to follow-up and those who refused or had unsuccessful retrieval. We collected demographic and clinical data including indications for placement and follow-up. Successful retrieval was defined as objective evidence of retrieval by medical records. RESULTS: Over a 4 year period, we identified 351 patients who had RIVC filter placements. We excluded 99 patients (65 died, 24 decided to leave filter in place, 7 had unsuccessful retrieval and 3 lost follow-up). Majority of the filters were placed for surgical patients (161, 63.9%). Of 252 eligible patients for retrieval, only 47 filters were successfully retrieved yielding a retrieval rate of 18.7%. We identified three predictors for successful retrieval: Male gender, home discharge and follow up with procedural service. CONCLUSION: In this large cohort we found that the retrieval rate of retrievable IVCF is extremely low consistent with national statistics. Male patients, patients who were discharged home and patients who were followed by the procedural service had higher chance of successful retrieval. We recommend that procedural service placing the filter should ascertain adequate follow-up. We are not certain why more males had successful retrieval than females. Further studies are necessary to investigate this finding.
Authors: David Liu; Erica Peterson; James Dooner; Mark Baerlocher; Leslie Zypchen; Joel Gagnon; Michael Delorme; Chad Kim Sing; Jason Wong; Randolph Guzman; Gavin Greenfield; Otto Moodley; Paul Yenson Journal: CMAJ Date: 2015-09-28 Impact factor: 8.262
Authors: Clive Kearon; Elie A Akl; Anthony J Comerota; Paolo Prandoni; Henri Bounameaux; Samuel Z Goldhaber; Michael E Nelson; Philip S Wells; Michael K Gould; Francesco Dentali; Mark Crowther; Susan R Kahn Journal: Chest Date: 2012-02 Impact factor: 9.410
Authors: Alan D Cook; Brian W Gross; Turner M Osler; Katelyn J Rittenhouse; Eric H Bradburn; Steven R Shackford; Frederick B Rogers Journal: JAMA Surg Date: 2017-08-01 Impact factor: 14.766