Inferior vena cava filters: Indications and management

Ronald F. Sing, Peter Fischer

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

15 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose of Review: The purpose of this review was to examine recent studies concerning the use of inferior vena cava (IVC) filters. Recent Findings: In the past 18 months, the American College of Chest Physicians released the 9th edition of their guideline for the prevention and treatment of venous thromboembolism. There have also been a number of studies reviewing the use of IVC filters in select populations for the prophylactic prevention of pulmonary embolism. Trauma continues to be the leading indication for prophylactic filters in a number of series, but further studies have demonstrated some benefit of prophylactic filters in the bariatric and spine surgery populations. The IVC filter complication rate remains low; however, so does the retrieval rate for potentially removable filters. These retrieval rates are increased with use of dedicated patient tracking mechanisms. Finally, there have been a number of technology updates in the hardware itself, focusing on strut design. Summary: Despite little change in the society guidelines, the use of vena cava filters (VCFs) continues to rise. Overall, the use of IVC filters, especially in prophylactic situations, will remain controversial until randomized, controlled trials are performed within each specific patient population.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)625-631
Number of pages7
JournalCurrent Opinion in Cardiology
Volume28
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - Nov 1 2013
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Vena Cava Filters
Patient Identification Systems
Guidelines
Population
Bariatric Surgery
Venous Thromboembolism
Pulmonary Embolism
Spine
Randomized Controlled Trials
Technology
Wounds and Injuries

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Cite this

Inferior vena cava filters : Indications and management. / Sing, Ronald F.; Fischer, Peter.

In: Current Opinion in Cardiology, Vol. 28, No. 6, 01.11.2013, p. 625-631.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

@article{62197838cfdc4743a350c330f891caf3,
title = "Inferior vena cava filters: Indications and management",
abstract = "Purpose of Review: The purpose of this review was to examine recent studies concerning the use of inferior vena cava (IVC) filters. Recent Findings: In the past 18 months, the American College of Chest Physicians released the 9th edition of their guideline for the prevention and treatment of venous thromboembolism. There have also been a number of studies reviewing the use of IVC filters in select populations for the prophylactic prevention of pulmonary embolism. Trauma continues to be the leading indication for prophylactic filters in a number of series, but further studies have demonstrated some benefit of prophylactic filters in the bariatric and spine surgery populations. The IVC filter complication rate remains low; however, so does the retrieval rate for potentially removable filters. These retrieval rates are increased with use of dedicated patient tracking mechanisms. Finally, there have been a number of technology updates in the hardware itself, focusing on strut design. Summary: Despite little change in the society guidelines, the use of vena cava filters (VCFs) continues to rise. Overall, the use of IVC filters, especially in prophylactic situations, will remain controversial until randomized, controlled trials are performed within each specific patient population.",
author = "Sing, {Ronald F.} and Peter Fischer",
year = "2013",
month = "11",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1097/HCO.0b013e3283655b97",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "28",
pages = "625--631",
journal = "Current Opinion in Cardiology",
issn = "0268-4705",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Inferior vena cava filters

T2 - Indications and management

AU - Sing, Ronald F.

AU - Fischer, Peter

PY - 2013/11/1

Y1 - 2013/11/1

N2 - Purpose of Review: The purpose of this review was to examine recent studies concerning the use of inferior vena cava (IVC) filters. Recent Findings: In the past 18 months, the American College of Chest Physicians released the 9th edition of their guideline for the prevention and treatment of venous thromboembolism. There have also been a number of studies reviewing the use of IVC filters in select populations for the prophylactic prevention of pulmonary embolism. Trauma continues to be the leading indication for prophylactic filters in a number of series, but further studies have demonstrated some benefit of prophylactic filters in the bariatric and spine surgery populations. The IVC filter complication rate remains low; however, so does the retrieval rate for potentially removable filters. These retrieval rates are increased with use of dedicated patient tracking mechanisms. Finally, there have been a number of technology updates in the hardware itself, focusing on strut design. Summary: Despite little change in the society guidelines, the use of vena cava filters (VCFs) continues to rise. Overall, the use of IVC filters, especially in prophylactic situations, will remain controversial until randomized, controlled trials are performed within each specific patient population.

AB - Purpose of Review: The purpose of this review was to examine recent studies concerning the use of inferior vena cava (IVC) filters. Recent Findings: In the past 18 months, the American College of Chest Physicians released the 9th edition of their guideline for the prevention and treatment of venous thromboembolism. There have also been a number of studies reviewing the use of IVC filters in select populations for the prophylactic prevention of pulmonary embolism. Trauma continues to be the leading indication for prophylactic filters in a number of series, but further studies have demonstrated some benefit of prophylactic filters in the bariatric and spine surgery populations. The IVC filter complication rate remains low; however, so does the retrieval rate for potentially removable filters. These retrieval rates are increased with use of dedicated patient tracking mechanisms. Finally, there have been a number of technology updates in the hardware itself, focusing on strut design. Summary: Despite little change in the society guidelines, the use of vena cava filters (VCFs) continues to rise. Overall, the use of IVC filters, especially in prophylactic situations, will remain controversial until randomized, controlled trials are performed within each specific patient population.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84886085573&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84886085573&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/HCO.0b013e3283655b97

DO - 10.1097/HCO.0b013e3283655b97

M3 - Review article

C2 - 24100649

AN - SCOPUS:84886085573

VL - 28

SP - 625

EP - 631

JO - Current Opinion in Cardiology

JF - Current Opinion in Cardiology

SN - 0268-4705

IS - 6

ER -