Key result
IJV access for IVC filters shows ~13% less significant placement tilt than FV access.
Why the study?
Maintaining the IVC filter as centered as possible is fundamental for its filtration function, but the relationship between vascular access and filter tilt angles is not well characterized.
Does internal jugular vein access compared to femoral vein access improve IVC filter tilt angles at placement and retrieval in patients requiring IVC filters?
Cohort (n=184)
Yes
Does internal jugular vein access compared to femoral vein access improve IVC filter tilt angles at placement and retrieval in patients requiring IVC filters?
Internal jugular vein access for IVC filter placement is associated with a lower initial tilt angle compared to femoral vein access, which may optimize filtration function.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
IJV access was associated with less initial tilt; leaves open whether access choice affects retrieval success or complications in practice.
Background: Inferior vena cava (IVC) filters are commonly used intravascular devices designed to prevent fatal pulmonary embolism (PE), maintaining the IVC filter as centered as possible is fundamental for achieving its filtration function. Objective: This study aimed to characterize the tilt angles of IVC filter between the vascular access of internal jugular vein (IJV) and femoral vein (FV), as well as to identify factors associated with increased or decreased tilt angles between placement and retrieval. Design: This is a multicenter retrospective study. Methods: A multicenter retrospective study was conducted from October 2017 to March 2019. The primary outcome was the change in filter tilt between placement and retrieval. The secondary outcome was the identifications of factors associated with increased or decreased tilt angle. Relevant variables were analyzed using t-tests, Chi-square tests, Fisher’s exact tests, while multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to determine risk factors. Results: A total of 184 eligible patients were included in this study. The IJV group had a lower likelihood of tilt angle over 10° at the time of placement compared to the FVs group (0% versus 12.5%, p = 0.040). Among the 171 patients with a mean dwell time of 22.1 days, the IJV group had a higher likelihood of tilt angle over 10° than the FVs group (10.3% versus 2.3%, p = 0.080). The use of FVs access at placement was associated with a higher difference between placement and retrieval filter tilt angles ( p < 0.01). Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that hypertension [odds ratio (OR) 0.668; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.328–1.358, p = 0.265], cardiologic artery disease (OR 0.537; 95% CI 0.136–2.130, p = 0.377), cerebral venous disease (OR 0.555; 95% CI 0.186–1.651, p = 0.290), filter types (OR 1.624; 95% CI 0.851–3.096, p = 0.141), and IVC filter thrombosis (OR 1.634; 95% CI 0.804–3.323, p = 0.175) were not associated with increased filter tilt angle. Right side (OR 0.434; 95% CI 0.202–0.930, p = 0.032) or bilateral lower extremity deep vein thrombosis (LEDVT) (OR 0.383; 95% CI 0.148–0.995, p = 0.049) were identified as protective factors. Conclusion: IJV access was associated with a lower filter tilt angle at the time of placement, while FVs access was linked to a higher difference between placement and retrieval tilt angles. Right side or bilateral LEDVT were identified as protective factors against increased IVC filter tilt angle.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gong et al. (2023) conducted a cohort in Patients requiring inferior vena cava (IVC) filters (n=184). Internal jugular vein (IJV) access vs. Femoral vein (FVs) access was evaluated on change in filter tilt between placement and retrieval (p=<0.01). Internal jugular vein access for IVC filters had a lower likelihood of tilt >10° at placement than femoral access (0% vs 12.5%, p=0.040), while femoral access had a higher tilt change at retrieval.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: