Key result
Prophylactic IVC filters show no PE benefit over anticoagulation alone in high-risk arthroplasty patients.
Why the study?
Despite anticoagulation, total joint arthroplasty patients at high risk for thrombotic events may benefit from prophylactic IVC filter placement, but data on outcomes and complications are limited.
Does prophylactic IVC filter placement prevent symptomatic pulmonary embolism in high-risk patients undergoing total joint arthroplasty?
Cohort (n=55)
No
Does prophylactic IVC filter placement prevent symptomatic pulmonary embolism in high-risk patients undergoing total joint arthroplasty?
Prophylactic IVC filter use in high-risk arthroplasty patients did not demonstrate an additional reduction in pulmonary embolism over standard therapy but exposed patients to procedural complications.
No PE reduction seen with prophylactic IVC filters plus insertional complications; leaves open efficacy and supports avoiding routine use in high-risk arthroplasty pending trials.
Background: Despite anticoagulation use, total joint arthroplasty has a 0.16-1.51%pulmonary embolism (PE) rate and a 0.1-0.2%fatal PE rate.The purpose of this study was to describe the post-operative thrombotic events and complications in patients at high-risk in two groups, those who had an IVC filter placed prior to total joint replacement surgery and those who did not.Methods: Patients from a single surgeon's practice were reviewed between January 1, 2012 to December 31, 2015 that were identified as high-risk for post-operative thrombotic events.Patient demographics, medical history, Charlson Comorbidity Index, filter-related complications, as well as post-operative deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, bleeding events and hospitalizations were collected retrospectively from the electronic medical records.Results: Fifty-five patients were identified, thirty-six of whom had a filter placed.Two of these had filter placement and removal on separate occasions for separate arthroplasty surgeries.Of the IVC filters placed, two insertional complications were identified.No filter retrieval complications occurred in the filters that were removed.There were nineteen patients deemed high risk for postoperative thrombotic events that did not undergo filter placement.Of these, there were no cases of pulmonary embolism.One patient was found to have a chronic lower-extremity DVT on post-operative work-up. Conclusion:In our series, there were two complications related to filter placement.The group of nineteen high risk patients without a filter placed showed no cases of symptomatic PE.Further multicenter study is required to make definitive recommendations on the use of IVC filters in select arthroplasty patients.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Daniel R. Mesko (2018) conducted a cohort in High-risk for post-operative thrombotic events undergoing total joint arthroplasty (n=55). Prophylactic Inferior Vena Cava (IVC) filter vs. No IVC filter placement was evaluated on Symptomatic pulmonary embolism. Prophylactic IVC filter placement in high-risk arthroplasty patients resulted in 0 cases of symptomatic pulmonary embolism, identical to the control group (0 cases), but had two insertional complications.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: