Key result
VCF procedures surge in Brazil, with the private sector performing ~57% despite similar mortality rates.
Why the study?
Venous thromboembolism is a major global health concern, but vena cava filter placement trends remain understudied in Brazil, particularly across its dual public-private healthcare system.
Do vena cava filter placement rates and in-hospital mortality differ between the private and public healthcare systems in Brazil?
Do vena cava filter placement rates and in-hospital mortality differ between the private and public healthcare systems in Brazil?
Vena cava filter placement in Brazil increased by 140% over 9 years, with significant systemic disparities showing a 4.25-fold higher per-capita rate in the private versus public healthcare system despite comparable in-hospital mortality.
Disparate VCF rates across Brazil's sectors despite similar mortality highlight inequity; leaves open drivers of appropriateness and access.
• The private sector performs the majority of procedures despite serving a minority of the population. • National procedure volume more than doubled (140% increase) in almost a decade. • The Southeast region is responsible for 70% of all private procedures. Venous Thromboembolism (VTE) is a major global health concern, with Vena Cava Filters (VCFs) serving as an alternative to anticoagulation in high-risk patients. Brazil’s VCF trends remain understudied, particularly in its dual public-private healthcare system. This database study allows a broad overview of the Brazilian healthcare landscape. This cross-sectional nationwide analysis used Brazilian public (SUS/TabNet) and private (ANS/D-TISS) healthcare databases (2015–2023) to assess VCF placement rates, regional disparities, and in-hospital mortality. Data included 21,630 procedures, analyzed via generalized linear models (Gamma/Poisson distributions). The private system performed 57% of VCFs (12,323) despite covering only 25% of the population, with a 4.25-fold higher procedure rate per capita than the public system (29.45 vs. 6.42 per-million). Women accounted for 57.8% of recipients. The Southeast region dominated (70% private, 40.5% public), while the North and Midwest had the lowest rates. Mortality rates were comparable (public 6.7% vs. private 7.4%, p = 0.066), peaking during COVID-19. Procedure volumes rose 140% over 9-years, contrasting with declining U.S. trends post-FDA restrictions. Brazil’s VCF use reflects systemic disparities, with private-system overrepresentation and regional gaps. This study enables unprecedented insights into large-scale VCF implementation across diverse healthcare subsystems.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bueno et al. (2026) studied this question. VCF procedures in Brazil more than doubled over 9 years, with private sector performing 57% despite covering 25% population and similar mortality rates in both sectors.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: