Literature DB >> 32422681

Outcomes after Vena Cava Filter Use in Patients with Cancer-Associated Venous Thromboembolism and Contraindications to Anticoagulation.

Andrés Quezada1, David Jiménez1, Behnood Bikdeli2,3,4, Alfonso Muriel5, Mario Aramberri6, Luciano López-Jiménez7, Joan Carles Sahuquillo8, Remedios Otero9, Angelo Porfidia10, Manuel Monreal11.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The association between the use of inferior vena cava filters (IVCFs) and outcomes among patients with cancer-associated thromboembolism (CT) and contraindications to anticoagulation remains unclear.
METHODS: In this prospective cohort study of patients with CT from the Registro Informatizado de la Enfermedad TromboEmbólica Registry, we assessed the association between IVCF insertion due to contraindication to anticoagulation and the outcomes of all-cause mortality, pulmonary embolism (PE)-related mortality, recurrent thromboembolism, and major bleeding rates through 30 days after initiation of treatment. We used propensity score matching to adjust for the likelihood of receiving a filter. For outcomes assessment, we implemented generalized estimating equation methods to incorporate the matched-pairs design, and adjusted for covariates that remained unbalanced after matching.
RESULTS: Of the 17,005 patients with CT, 270 underwent IVCF placement because of contraindication to anticoagulation. Of those, 247 were successfully matched with 247 patients treated without a filter. Propensity score-matched pairs showed a nonsignificantly lower risk of all-cause death (12.2% vs. 17.0%; p = 0.13), and a significantly lower risk of PE-related mortality (0.8% vs. 4.0%; p = 0.04) for patients receiving IVCFs compared with those who did not. While there was no significant difference in the rate of major bleeding (6.1% vs. 5.7%; p = 0.85), risk-adjusted recurrent rates were higher for patients who received IVCFs compared with those who did not (7.3% vs. 3.2%; p = 0.05).
CONCLUSION: In patients with CT and a contraindication to anticoagulation, IVCF insertion was associated with a lower risk of PE-related death, and a higher risk of recurrences. Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32422681     DOI: 10.1055/s-0040-1710589

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Thromb Haemost        ISSN: 0340-6245            Impact factor:   5.249


  4 in total

Review 1.  2022 international clinical practice guidelines for the treatment and prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism in patients with cancer, including patients with COVID-19.

Authors:  Dominique Farge; Corinne Frere; Jean M Connors; Alok A Khorana; Ajay Kakkar; Cihan Ay; Andres Muñoz; Benjamin Brenner; Pedro H Prata; Dialina Brilhante; Darko Antic; Patricia Casais; María Cecilia Guillermo Esposito; Takayuki Ikezoe; Syed A Abutalib; Luis A Meillon-García; Henri Bounameaux; Ingrid Pabinger; James Douketis
Journal:  Lancet Oncol       Date:  2022-07       Impact factor: 54.433

2.  Structured team-oriented program to follow patients after vena cava filter placement: a step forward in improving quality for filter retrieval.

Authors:  Salah D Qanadli; Kiara Rezaei-Kalantari; Laurence Crivelli; Francesco Doenz; Anne-Marie Jouannic; David C Rotzinger
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-02-10       Impact factor: 4.379

Review 3.  Current status of treatment of cancer-associated venous thromboembolism.

Authors:  Wei Xiong
Journal:  Thromb J       Date:  2021-03-31

4.  EHA Guidelines on Management of Antithrombotic Treatments in Thrombocytopenic Patients With Cancer.

Authors:  Anna Falanga; Avi Leader; Chiara Ambaglio; Zsuzsa Bagoly; Giancarlo Castaman; Ismail Elalamy; Ramon Lecumberri; Alexander Niessner; Ingrid Pabinger; Sebastian Szmit; Alice Trinchero; Hugo Ten Cate; Bianca Rocca
Journal:  Hemasphere       Date:  2022-07-13
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.