Key result
Retrievable IVC filters offer feasible PE protection despite potential complications and failed retrievals.
Why the study?
Retrievable inferior vena cava filters are increasingly used due to long-term risks of permanent filters, but their efficacy, safety, and retrievability require review.
What are the efficacy, safety, and retrievability of retrievable inferior vena cava filters in patients with venous thromboembolic disorders?
What are the efficacy, safety, and retrievability of retrievable inferior vena cava filters in patients with venous thromboembolic disorders?
This review summarizes the efficacy, safety, and retrievability of retrievable IVC filters for preventing fatal pulmonary embolism in venous thromboembolic disorders.
Should not yet change IVC filter practice in VTE; leaves open need for RCTs on optimal selection and retrieval.
Inferior vena cava (IVC) filters are used as an alternative to anticoagulants for prevention of fatal pulmonary embolism (PE) in venous thromboembolic disorders. Retrievable IVC filters have become an increasingly attractive option due to the long-term risks of permanent filter placement. These devices are shown to be technically feasible in insertion and retrieval percutaneously while providing protection from PE. Nevertheless, there are complications and failed retrievals with these retrievable filters. The aim of the paper is to review the retrievable filters and their efficacy, safety, and retrievability.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ni et al. (2013) conducted a review in Venous thromboembolic disorders. Retrievable inferior vena cava (IVC) filters was evaluated on Efficacy, safety, and retrievability. Retrievable inferior vena cava filters are technically feasible for percutaneous insertion and retrieval to protect against pulmonary embolism, though complications and failed retrievals can occur.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: