The role of an IVC filter retrieval clinic—A single center retrospective analysis

Abstract

Background: Inferior vena cava (IVC) filter placement still plays an essential role in preventing pulmonary embolism (PE) in patients with contraindications to anticoagulant therapy. However, IVC filter placement does have long-term risks which may be mitigated by retrieving them as soon as clinically acceptable. A dedicated IVC filter clinic provides a potential means of assuring adequate follow-up and retrieval. Aim: To assess the efficacy of our Inferior vena cava (IVC) filter retrieval clinic at improving the rate of patient follow-up, effective filter management, and retrieval rates. Materials and Methods: During the period of August 2017 through July 2018, 70 IVC filters were placed at our institution, and these patients were automatically enrolled into our IVC filter retrieval clinic for quarterly follow-up. We retrospectively reviewed data including appropriateness for removal at 3 months, overall retrieval rates, removal technique(s) employed, and technical success. Results: 62.9% of the potentially retrievable filters were removed during the study period. The technical success of extraction, using a combination of standard and advanced techniques, was 91.7%. Overall, 15% of the patients were lost to follow-up. Conclusion: Our findings add to the growing body of literature to support the need for a robust IVC filter retrieval clinic to ensure adequate follow-up and timely retrieval of IVC filters.

Keywords

Anticoagulation - Hangman technique - IVC filter - loop snare - pulmonary embolism - retrieval - venous thromboembolism

Publication History

Received: 15 June 2019

Accepted: 12 October 2019

Article published online:
21 July 2021

• References

• 1 Heit JA. Venous thromboembolism: Disease burden, outcomes and risk factors. J Thromb Haemost 2005; 3: 1611-7
• 2 Holly BP, Funaki B, Lessne ML. Inferior vena cava filters: Why, Who, and for How Long?. Clin Chest Med 2018; 39: 645-50
• 3 Patel G, Panikkath R, Fenire M, Gadwala S, Nugent K. Indications and appropriateness of inferior vena cava filter placement. Am J Med Sci 2015; 349: 212-6
• 4 Silverstein MD, Heit JA, Mohr DN, Petterson TM, O’Fallon WM, Melton 3rd LJ. Trends in the incidence of deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism: A 25-year population-based study. Arch Intern Med 1998; 158: 585-93
• 5 Removing Retrievable Inferior Vena Cava Filters: Initial Communication: Food and Drug Administration. 2010 Available from: https://wayback.archive-it.org/7993/20170112002302/ http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/Safety/Alertsand Notices/ucm221676.htm
• 6 Stein PD, Matta F, Keyes DC, Willyerd GL. Impact of vena cava filters on in-hospital case fatality rate from pulmonary embolism. Am J Med 2012; 125: 478-84
• 7 Duszak Jr R, Parker L, Levin DC, Rao VM. Placement and removal of inferior vena cava filters: National trends in the medicare population. J Am Coll Radiol 2011; 8: 483-9
• 8 Mohapatra A, Liang NL, Chaer RA, Tzeng E. Persistently low inferior vena cava filter retrieval rates in a population-based cohort. J Vasc Surg 2019; 7: 38-44
• 9 Everhart D, Vaccaro J, Worley K, Rogstad TL, Seleznick M. Retrospective analysis of outcomes following inferior vena cava (IVC) filter placement in a managed care population. J Thromb Thrombolysis 2017; 44: 179-89
• 10 Jia Z, Fuller TA, McKinney JM, Paz-Fumagalli R, Frey GT, Sella DM. et al. Utility of retrievable inferior vena cava filters: A systematic literature review and analysis of the reasons for nonretrieval of filters with temporary indications. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 2018; 41: 675-82
• 11 Tao MJ, Montbriand JM, Eisenberg N, Sniderman KW, Roche-Nagle G. Temporary inferior vena cava filter indications, retrieval rates, and follow-up management at a multicenter tertiary care institution. J Vasc Surg 2016; 64: 430-7
• 12 Tsui B, An T, Moon E, King R, Wang W. Retrospective review of 516 implantations of option inferior vena cava filters at a single health care system. J Vasc Intervent Radiol 2016; 27: 345-53
• 13 Guez D, Hansberry DR, Eschelman DJ, Gonsalves CF, Parker L, Rao VM. et al. Inferior vena cava filter placement and retrieval rates among radiologists and nonradiologists. J Vasc Intervent Radiol 2018; 29: 482-5
• 14 Rubenstein L, Chun AK, Chew M, Binkert CA. Loop-snare technique for difficult inferior vena cava filter retrievals. J Vasc Intervent Radiol 2007; 18: 1315-8
• 15 Al-Hakim R, McWilliams JP, Derry W, Kee ST. The hangman technique: A modified loop snare technique for the retrieval of inferior vena cava filters with embedded hooks. J Vasc Intervent Radiol 2015; 26: 107-10
• 16 Sutphin PD, Reis SP, McKune A, Ravanzo M, Kalva SP, Pillai AK. Improving inferior vena cava filter retrieval rates with the define, measure, analyze, improve, control methodology. J Vasc Intervent Radiol 2015; 26: 491-8.e1
• 17 Inagaki E, Farber A, Eslami MH, Siracuse JJ, Rybin DV, Sarosiek S. et al. Improving the retrieval rate of inferior vena cava filters with a multidisciplinary team approach. J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord 2016; 4: 276-82
• 18 Klinken S, Humphries C, Ferguson J. Establishment of an inferior vena cava filter database and interventional radiology led follow-up-retrieval rates and patients lost to follow-up. J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol 2017; 61: 630-5
• 19 Dowell JD, Shah SH, Cooper KJ, Yildiz V, Pan X. Cost-benefit analysis of establishing an inferior vena cava filter clinic. Diagn Interv Radiol 2017; 23: 37-42