Premium
Use of inferior vena cava filters in a tertiary referral centre in Australia
Author(s) -
Tiwari Alok,
Saw Chong,
Li Michelle,
Mohan Irwin,
Daly Tom,
Swinnen John,
Richardson Arthur,
So Simon,
Young Noel,
Vicaretti Mauro,
Fletcher John
Publication year - 2010
Publication title -
anz journal of surgery
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.426
H-Index - 70
eISSN - 1445-2197
pISSN - 1445-1433
DOI - 10.1111/j.1445-2197.2009.05082.x
Subject(s) - medicine , contraindication , inferior vena cava , tertiary referral hospital , radiological weapon , surgery , venous thromboembolism , vena cava filters , prospective cohort study , radiology , retrospective cohort study , thrombosis , venous thrombosis , alternative medicine , pathology
To investigate the use of inferior vena cava (IVC) filters in a tertiary referral centre, looking at indication, types of filters and, with temporary/optional filters, removal rates. Methods: Data was collected from a prospective database of all IVC filters inserted from January 2003 to January 2007. Patients' records and radiological imaging were all reviewed. Results: 66 patients (40 males) had IVC filters inserted during the study period. The median age of the male patients was 57.5 (21–79) years, and females 56 (24–81). There were 49 (74.2%) temporary/optional filters and 17 (25.8%) permanent filters. The most common indication for filter was a contraindication to anticoagulation for both permanent (64.7%) and temporary/optional filters (77.6%). In the temporary/optional filter group, 38 of 49 (77.6%) patients had documented venous thromboembolism, while in the permanent filter group, this was 14 of 17 (82.4%). Of the optional filters, 22 of 49 (45.8%) have been removed. Conclusion: More than half (54.2%) of temporary/optional filters were not removed and with potential for long‐term complications. A protocol has now being instituted for vascular surgeons to authorize the insertion of filters and to then be responsible for ensuring their removal.