Inferior vena cava filter use at a large community hospital: a retrospective cohort study.

Autor: Fontyn S; Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, London, ON, Canada., Bai Y; Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, London, ON, Canada., Bolger S; Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, London, ON, Canada., Greco K; Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, London, ON, Canada., Wang TF; Department of Medicine, University of Ottawa at The Ottawa Hospital and Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Canada., Hamm C; Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, London, ON, Canada.; Department of Medical Oncology, Windsor Regional Cancer Centre, 1995 Lens Avenue, Windsor, ON, N8W 1L9, Canada., Cervi A; Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, London, ON, Canada. andrea.cervi@medportal.ca.; Department of Medical Oncology, Windsor Regional Cancer Centre, 1995 Lens Avenue, Windsor, ON, N8W 1L9, Canada. andrea.cervi@medportal.ca.
Jazyk: angličtina
Zdroj: Scientific reports [Sci Rep] 2024 May 03; Vol. 14 (1), pp. 10192. Date of Electronic Publication: 2024 May 03.
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-024-60868-z
Abstrakt: Inferior vena cava (IVC) filters are considered when patients with venous thromboembolism (VTE) develop a contraindication to anticoagulation. Use of IVC filters is increasing, despite associated complications and lack of data on efficacy in reducing VTE-related mortality. We characterized the pattern of IVC filter use at a large community hospital between 2018 and 2022. Specifically, we assessed the indications for IVC filter insertion, filter removal rates, and filter-associated complications. Indications for IVC filters were compared to those outlined by current clinical practice guidelines. We reviewed 120 consecutive filter placement events. The most common indications included recent VTE and active bleeding (40.0%) or need for anticoagulation interruption for surgery (25.8%). Approximately one-third (30.0%) of IVC filters were inserted for indications either not supported or addressed by guidelines. Half (50.0%) of patients had successful removal of their IVC filter. At least 13 patients (10.8%) experienced a filter-related complication. In a large community-based practice, nearly one-third of IVC filters were inserted for indications not universally supported by current practice guidelines. Moreover, most IVC filters were not removed, raising the risk of filter-associated complications, and supporting the need for development of comprehensive guidelines addressing use of IVC filters, and post-insertion monitoring practices.
(© 2024. The Author(s).)
Databáze: MEDLINE
Externí odkaz: