Patrick Mismetti1, Silvy Laporte2, Olivier Pellerin3, Pierre-Vladimir Ennezat4, Francis Couturaud5, Antoine Elias6, Nicolas Falvo7, Nicolas Meneveau8, Isabelle Quere9, Pierre-Marie Roy10, Olivier Sanchez11, Jeannot Schmidt12, Christophe Seinturier13, Marie-Antoinette Sevestre14, Jean-Paul Beregi15, Bernard Tardy16, Philippe Lacroix17, Emilie Presles18, Alain Leizorovicz19, Hervé Decousus20, Fabrice-Guy Barral21, Guy Meyer22. 1. Service de Médecine Vasculaire et Thérapeutique, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Saint-Etienne, France2Université Jean Monnet, Groupe d'Investigation et de Recherche Clinique sur la Thrombose, Saint-Etienne, France3Unité de Pharmacologie Clinique, Cen. 2. Université Jean Monnet, Groupe d'Investigation et de Recherche Clinique sur la Thrombose, Saint-Etienne, France3Unité de Pharmacologie Clinique, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Saint-Etienne, France. 3. Faculté de Médecine, Université Paris Descartes, Sorbonne Paris Cité, France5Service de Radiologie Interventionnelle, Hôpital Européen Georges Pompidou, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, France. 4. Département de Cardiologie, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Grenoble, La Tronche, France. 5. Département de Médecine Interne et Pneumologie, Hôpital La Cavale Blanche, Université De Bretagne occidentale, Brest, France. 6. Service de Médecine Vasculaire et Médecine Interne, Pôle Cardiologie-Vasculaire, Hôpital Sainte Musse, Centre Hospitalier Intercommunal Toulon La Seyne sur Mer, France. 7. Département de Pathologie Vasculaire, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Dijon Bocage, France. 8. Département de Cardiologie, Centre Hospitalier Régional Universitaire Hôpital Jean Minjoz, Besançon, France. 9. Service de Médecine Vasculaire, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Montpellier, Université de Montpellier I, France. 10. Cardioprotection, Remodelage, et Thrombose and Service des Urgences, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire d'Angers, France 13Université Nantes Angers Le Mans, France. 11. Service de Pneumologie, Hôpital Européen Georges Pompidou, Université Paris Descartes, Sorbonne Paris Cité, France. 12. Pôle Urgences, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Gabriel Montpied, Clermont-Ferrand, France16Université 1 d'Auvergne, Clermont Ferrand, France. 13. Service de Médecine Vasculaire, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Grenoble, France. 14. Service de Médecine Vasculaire, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire d'Amiens, France. 15. Service de Radiologie, Hôpital Cardiologique, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Lille, France. 16. Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Saint-Etienne, Hôpital Nord, Service Médecine d'Urgences et Réanimation, France21Université de Lyon, Université de Saint-Etienne, France. 17. Service de Médecine Vasculaire, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Limoges, France. 18. Unité de Pharmacologie Clinique, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Saint-Etienne, France. 19. Unité Mixte de Recherche/Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, University of Lyon, France. 20. Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Saint-Etienne, Hôpital Nord, Service Médecine Vasculaire et Thérapeutique, France. 21. Service de Radiologie, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Saint-Etienne, France 26Université Jean Monnet, Saint-Etienne, France. 22. Université Nantes Angers Le Mans, France.
Abstract
IMPORTANCE: Although retrievable inferior vena cava filters are frequently used in addition to anticoagulation in patients with acute venous thromboembolism, their benefit-risk ratio is unclear. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of retrievable vena cava filters plus anticoagulation vs anticoagulation alone for preventing pulmonary embolism recurrence in patients presenting with acute pulmonary embolism and a high risk of recurrence. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Randomized, open-label, blinded end point trial (PREPIC2) with 6-month follow-up conducted from August 2006 to January 2013. Hospitalized patients with acute, symptomatic pulmonary embolism associated with lower-limb vein thrombosis and at least 1 criterion for severity were assigned to retrievable inferior vena cava filter implantation plus anticoagulation (filter group; n = 200) or anticoagulation alone with no filter implantation (control group; n = 199). Initial hospitalization with ambulatory follow-up occurred in 17 French centers. INTERVENTIONS: Full-dose anticoagulation for at least 6 months in all patients. Insertion of a retrievable inferior vena cava filter in patients randomized to the filter group. Filter retrieval was planned at 3 months from placement. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Primary efficacy outcome was symptomatic recurrent pulmonary embolism at 3 months. Secondary outcomes were recurrent pulmonary embolism at 6 months, symptomatic deep vein thrombosis, major bleeding, death at 3 and 6 months, and filter complications. RESULTS: In the filter group, the filter was successfully inserted in 193 patients and was retrieved as planned in 153 of the 164 patients in whom retrieval was attempted. By 3 months, recurrent pulmonary embolism had occurred in 6 patients (3.0%; all fatal) in the filter group and in 3 patients (1.5%; 2 fatal) in the control group (relative risk with filter, 2.00 [95% CI, 0.51-7.89]; P = .50). Results were similar at 6 months. No difference was observed between the 2 groups regarding the other outcomes. Filter thrombosis occurred in 3 patients. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among hospitalized patients with severe acute pulmonary embolism, the use of a retrievable inferior vena cava filter plus anticoagulation compared with anticoagulation alone did not reduce the risk of symptomatic recurrent pulmonary embolism at 3 months. These findings do not support the use of this type of filter in patients who can be treated with anticoagulation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00457158.
RCT Entities:
IMPORTANCE: Although retrievable inferior vena cava filters are frequently used in addition to anticoagulation in patients with acute venous thromboembolism, their benefit-risk ratio is unclear. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of retrievable vena cava filters plus anticoagulation vs anticoagulation alone for preventing pulmonary embolism recurrence in patients presenting with acute pulmonary embolism and a high risk of recurrence. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Randomized, open-label, blinded end point trial (PREPIC2) with 6-month follow-up conducted from August 2006 to January 2013. Hospitalized patients with acute, symptomatic pulmonary embolism associated with lower-limb vein thrombosis and at least 1 criterion for severity were assigned to retrievable inferior vena cava filter implantation plus anticoagulation (filter group; n = 200) or anticoagulation alone with no filter implantation (control group; n = 199). Initial hospitalization with ambulatory follow-up occurred in 17 French centers. INTERVENTIONS: Full-dose anticoagulation for at least 6 months in all patients. Insertion of a retrievable inferior vena cava filter in patients randomized to the filter group. Filter retrieval was planned at 3 months from placement. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Primary efficacy outcome was symptomatic recurrent pulmonary embolism at 3 months. Secondary outcomes were recurrent pulmonary embolism at 6 months, symptomatic deep vein thrombosis, major bleeding, death at 3 and 6 months, and filter complications. RESULTS: In the filter group, the filter was successfully inserted in 193 patients and was retrieved as planned in 153 of the 164 patients in whom retrieval was attempted. By 3 months, recurrent pulmonary embolism had occurred in 6 patients (3.0%; all fatal) in the filter group and in 3 patients (1.5%; 2 fatal) in the control group (relative risk with filter, 2.00 [95% CI, 0.51-7.89]; P = .50). Results were similar at 6 months. No difference was observed between the 2 groups regarding the other outcomes. Filter thrombosis occurred in 3 patients. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among hospitalized patients with severe acute pulmonary embolism, the use of a retrievable inferior vena cava filter plus anticoagulation compared with anticoagulation alone did not reduce the risk of symptomatic recurrent pulmonary embolism at 3 months. These findings do not support the use of this type of filter in patients who can be treated with anticoagulation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00457158.
Authors: Steven Y Huang; Bruno C Odisio; Sharjeel H Sabir; Joe E Ensor; Andrew S Niekamp; Tam T Huynh; Michael Kroll; Sanjay Gupta Journal: J Thromb Thrombolysis Date: 2017-07 Impact factor: 2.300
Authors: Meritxell Mellado; Javier Trujillo-Santos; Behnood Bikdeli; David Jiménez; Manuel Jesús Núñez; Martin Ellis; Pablo Javier Marchena; Jerónimo Ramón Vela; Albert Clara; Farès Moustafa; Manuel Monreal Journal: Intern Emerg Med Date: 2019-05-03 Impact factor: 3.397
Authors: Adam Cuker; Gowthami M Arepally; Beng H Chong; Douglas B Cines; Andreas Greinacher; Yves Gruel; Lori A Linkins; Stephen B Rodner; Sixten Selleng; Theodore E Warkentin; Ashleigh Wex; Reem A Mustafa; Rebecca L Morgan; Nancy Santesso Journal: Blood Adv Date: 2018-11-27