Loop-Snare Technique for Difficult Inferior Vena Cava Filter Retrievals

Inferior Vena Cava Filter Retrieval: Simple to Complex

Retrievable inferior vena cava filters were designed to provide mechanical prophylaxis from pulmonary embolism with the intent for retrieval once no longer indicated, and have been utilized at a high rate since their introduction. Unfortunately, retrieval rates have historically lagged behind, in part due to significant rates of failed standard retrieval techniques for filters with prolonged dwell time. Refinement in advanced retrieval techniques has now allowed (in experienced centers) for safe removal of filters previously considered irretrievable. An individualized approach is necessary for each potential advanced filter retrieval to determine appropriate course of action. This review will emphasize complex filter retrieval techniques amidst a larger discussion of inferior vena cava filters and their management.

Balloon-Assisted Retrieval of a Retained Vascular Sheath during Complex Inferior Vena Cava Filter Removal

A potential complication of complex endovascular procedures is retained foreign bodies such as fragmented catheters, wires, stents, or sheaths in the intravascular space. Different techniques are available for retrieval of intravascular foreign bodies including snares, forceps, baskets, tip-deflecting wires, and balloon catheters. The aim of this article is to describe our experience in which a lost large intravascular sheath was retrieved using balloon assistance. We also provide a review of different techniques used for intravascular large sheath retrieval and methods to avoid this complication during endovascular procedures such as complex inferior vena cava filter removal.

Difficult withdrawal of an inferior vena cava filter: Technical considerations and associated variables

OBJECTIVE

To analyse the efficacy of the procedure for withdrawing an inferior vena cava (IVC) filter and the clinical and radiological factors associated with difficult withdrawal.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This retrospective observational study included patients who underwent IVC filter withdrawal at a single centre between May 2015 and May 2021. We recorded demographic, clinical, procedural, and radiological variables: type of IVC filter, angle with the IVC > 15°, hook against the wall, and legs embedded in the IVC wall > 3 mm. The efficacy variables were fluoroscopy time, success of IVC filter withdrawal, and number of attempts to withdraw the filter. The safety variables were complications, surgical removal, and mortality. The main variable was difficult withdrawal, defined as more than 5 min fluoroscopy or more than 1 attempt at withdrawal.

RESULTS

A total of 109 patients were included; withdrawal was considered difficult in 54 (49.5%). Three radiological variables were more common in the difficult withdrawal group: hook against the wall (33.3% vs. 9.1%; p = 0.027), embedded legs (20.4% vs. 3.6%; p = 0.008), and >45 days since IVC filter placement (51.9% vs. 25.5%; p = 0.006). These variables remained significant in the subgroup of patients with OptEase IVC filters; however, in the group of patients with Celect IVC filters, only the inclination of the IVC filter >15 ° was significantly associated with difficult withdrawal (25% vs 0%; p = 0.029).

CONCLUSION

Difficult withdrawal was associated with time from IVC placement, embedded legs, and contact between the hook and the wall. The analysis of the subgroups of patients with different types of IVC filters found that these variables remained significant in those with OptEase filters; however, in those with cone-shaped devices (Celect), the inclination of the IVC filter >15° was significantly associated with difficult withdrawal.

Retrievable Inferior Vena Cava Filters-Use, Removal, and Removal Techniques

The use of retrievable inferior vena cava filters is on the rise, but there is an inadequate number of these filters being removed even if their use as a prophylactic for venous thromboembolism is no longer indicated. Complications with retrievable filters that remain in the patient for an extended duration include examples such as filter tilt and embedding into the caval wall. This raises concerns for whether the filter is properly functioning and for consequent sequelae, including recurrent thrombosis, stenosis, or inferior vena cava perforation. With these complications, there are also challenges to retrieving these filters via the standard techniques and thus more advanced techniques are required. Both standard and advanced techniques, their uses, and possible risks of these methods are also discussed.

Endobronchial Forceps Retrieval of Embedded Inferior Vena Cava Filters: Retrieval of 535 Filters at a Single Center

PURPOSE

To report results of 16 years of using the endobronchial forceps technique to remove embedded inferior vena cava (IVC) filters.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between January 2005 and June 2021, 534 patients (310 women and 224 men) with a mean age of 52 years (standard deviation [SD] ± 16 years) presented for complex filter retrieval of 535 tip- or strut-embedded IVC filters. Tip-embedded filters were diagnosed on rotational venography. Filters were considered strut-embedded if they were closed-cell filters with dwell times of >6 months. The filter was dissected from the IVC using rigid bronchoscopy forceps and removed through a vascular sheath.

RESULTS

The endobronchial forceps technique was successful in 530 of 537 retrieval attempts on an intention-to-treat basis (98.7%); a total of 530 filters were retrieved. There were 7 failures: (a) 5 failed retrieval attempts (2 that were retrieved successfully in subsequent procedures) and (b) 2 for which retrieval was not attempted. The mean filter dwell time was 1,459 days (SD ± 1,617 days). Laser sheaths were not used for any removal. Filters included herein were 137 Celect (94 Celect and 43 Celect Platinum), 99 Günther Tulip, 72 Option (48 Option and 24 Option Elite), 68 G2, 45 G2X/Eclipse, 42 Denali, 30 OptEase, 29 Recovery, 7 Meridian, and 6 ALN with Hook filters. Thirty-four minor (6.3%) and 11 major (2%) adverse events (AEs) occurred, which did not result in permanent sequelae.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of endobronchial forceps for removal of tip- and strut-embedded retrievable IVC filters is effective and has low AE rates.

Safety and Success Rates of Excimer Laser Sheath-Assisted Retrieval of Embedded Inferior Vena Cava Filters

IMPORTANCE

Despite historically high rates of use, most inferior vena cava (IVC) filters are not retrieved. The US Food and Drug Administration safety communications recommended retrieval when the IVC filter is no longer indicated out of concern for filter-related complications. However, failure rates are high when using standard techniques for retrieval of long-dwelling filters, and until recently, there have been no devices approved for retrieval of embedded IVC filters.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the safety and success of excimer laser sheath-assisted retrieval of embedded IVC filters.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

A retrospective, multicenter, clinical cohort study of excimer laser sheath-assisted IVC filter retrievals from 7 US sites was conducted between March 1, 2012, and February 28, 2021, among 265 patients who underwent IVC filter retrieval using the laser. Patients were substratified between a high-volume single center and a multicenter data set. A blinded physician committee adjudicated reported complications and their association with use of the laser.

EXPOSURES

Retrieval of IVC filters using excimer laser sheath.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary safety end point was device-related major complication rate (Society of Interventional Radiology categories C to F, which included any adverse event associated with morbidity or disability that increases the level of care, results in hospital admission, or substantially lengthens the hospital stay). The primary success end point was technical success of IVC filter retrieval. The primary end points were compared with literature-derived, meta-analysis-suggested target performance goals.

RESULTS

The single-center experience included 139 participants (mean [SD] age, 52 [16] years; 78 female participants [56.1%]), and the multicenter experience included 126 participants (mean [SD] age, 52 [16] years; 75 female participants [59.5%]). The device-related major complication rate was 2.9% (4 of 139; 95% CI, 0.8%-7.2%; P = .001) for the single-center experience and 4.0% (5 of 126; 95% CI, 1.3%-9.0%; P = .01) for the multicenter experience, both of which were significantly lower than the primary safety performance goal (10%). No major complications were considered to be definitively associated with use of the laser. The technical success rate was 95.7% (133 of 139; 95% CI, 90.8%-98.4%; P = .007) for the single-center experience and 95.2% (120 of 126; 95% CI, 89.9%-98.2%; P = .02) for the multicenter experience, both of which were significantly higher than the primary performance goal (89.4%).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This cohort study demonstrated high technical success and low complication rates of excimer laser sheath-assisted retrieval of embedded IVC filters in centers with variable case volume and experience, which suggests a wide applicability of the technique with proper training. The excimer laser sheath offers physicians a valuable tool for retrieval of challenging embedded IVC filters.

Device for retrieval of vena cava filter with combination of a multi-loop snare and Amplatz catheter

A 25-year-old woman diagnosed as having a non-massive pulmonary embolism and deep vein thrombosis from the right superficial femoral to the right common iliac vein was treated by deployment of a DENALI^® Vena Cava Filter. Filter retrieval was attempted 6 months later using a BARD snare retrieval kit. However, the conventional technique was unsuccessful because of a tilt and attachment of the filter head to the vessel wall. Hence, we passed an EN Snare Endovascular Snare System through an Amplatz Left 1 guiding catheter to successfully penetrate the attached portion of the filter hook and vessel wall. This combination provided controlled direction and a strong backup force that helped capture and retrieve the filter. This technique could be an alternative method to retrieve inferior vena cava filter with severe tilt and tight attachment to the vena cava wall when the conventional technique is unsuccessful.

Vena Cava Filters: Toward Optimal Strategies for Filter Retrieval and Patients' Follow-Up

Mortality rates associated with venous thromboembolism (VTE) are high. Inferior vena cava filters (IVCFs) have been frequently placed for these patients as part of their treatment, albeit the paucity of data showing their ultimate efficacy and potential risk of complications. Issues regarding long-term filter dwell time are accounted for in society guidelines. This topic has led to an FDA mandate for filter retrieved as soon as protection from pulmonary embolism is no longer needed. However, even though most are retrievable, some were inadvertently left as permanent, which carries an incremental lifetime risk to the patient. In the past decade, attempts have aimed to determine the optimal time interval during which filter needs to be removed. In addition, distinct strategies have been implemented to boost retrieval rates. This review discusses current conflicts in indications, the not uncommon complications, the rationale and need for timely retrieval, and different quality improvement strategies to fulfill this aim.

Biopsy Forceps-Assisted Loop Snare Technique for Complex Retrieval of Inferior Vena Cava Filter

Severe tilt with embedded hooks is a common obstacle to successful inferior vena cava (IVC) filter retrieval. We present a case for which the biopsy forceps-assisted loop snare technique was successfully used to retrieve filters with hooks embedded in the IVC wall for which conventional retrieval failed. The technique is effective and provides a less-invasive, low-cost method for the complex retrieval of IVC filters.

Endovascular removal of intravascular foreign bodies: A single-center experience and literature review

OBJECTIVE

To describe causes, clinical signs, experience and endovascular techniques for extraction of intravenous foreign bodies (IFB) and literature review.

METHODS

This retrospective study was based on data collected from the medical records of 51 consecutive patients (26 women and 25 men) treated from July 2007 to May 2020 at a single quaternary center in Brazil and case series with data, published in the literature since 2000 on IFB removal, of at least five patients. The average patient age was 43.54 years (range, 2 months to 84 years). The different retrieval method using the following was used in the procedure: gooseneck snare, guidewire, balloon, and custom snares.

RESULTS

The retrieval process rate was 100%. Thirty-one port-a-caths, six guidewires, four double lumens, three permcaths, three Shiley® catheters, one intra cath, two peripherally inserted central catheters, and one stent were extracted. The locations where the IFBs were most frequently trapped were the right atrium (39.2%), the pulmonary artery (17.64%), the superior vena cava (13.72%), and the right ventricle (16.12%). Single venous access was used in 67.07% of the patients. Femoral access, which was the most commonly used approach, was used in 85.71% of the patients. The loop was used in 64.70% of the patients. A fractured catheter was the main IFB in 60.76% of the cases (31 patients). Only one complication related to the extraction of an IFB was noted in a single patient who suffered from atrial fibrillation (1.96%). The 30-day mortality rate was zero.

CONCLUSION

Percutaneous IFB removal should be considered as an alternative for the treatment and retrieval of IFBs because it is a minimally invasive procedure that is relatively simple, safe, and has low complication rates.

Successful retrieval of dislocated inferior vena cava filter using double vascular sheaths docking technology: case report

BACKGROUND

Dislocation of inferior vena cava filter (IVCF) is a rare complication with potential IVC perforation and other life-threatening risks requiring early diagnosis and in-time retrieval. Most of dislocation IVCF in the past have been shelved or removed by open surgery. It is very difficult to retrieve the filters by interventional technology.

CASE PRESENTATION

Here we report a 49-year-old man suffering from dislocation of IVCF implanted due to deep vein thrombosis (DVT) in the right femoral vein. Successful retrieval of the IVCF using double sheaths docking technique was done soon after confirmation of the dislocation. Importance of monitoring and early detection of dislocation of IVCF should be emphasized to avoid further complications.

CONCLUSIONS

The double vascular sheaths docking technique can be considered as a preferential option in difficult operative situation.

An expert spotlight on inferior vena cava filters

Introduction: Inferior vena cava (IVC) filters are mechanical filtration devices designed as an alternative to surgical ligation/plication of the IVC. Their use has been controversial, especially with the introduction of retrievable filters and expanded/prophylactic indications.Areas covered: Authors discuss the types of available IVC filters, indications for placement, evidence on their effectiveness in general and specific patient populations, procedural considerations, off-label use, complications, and filter retrieval. This review is based on manuscripts/abstracts published from 1960 to 2021 on venous thromboembolism and IVC filters.Expert opinion: Despite the limited data on their effectiveness and survival benefit, IVC filters continue to play an important role in the treatment of patients with venous thromboembolism (VTE) who cannot receive standard anticoagulation. There is no role of IVC filters in patients without VTE. While retrievable filters are desirable for short-term use, a dedicated team-based approach, and advanced training are required for their successful removal. Newer devices are promising in improving patient safety . The device manufacturers and regulatory agencies should consider specific approaches to track device-related adverse events. Population-based studies are required to establish optimal patient population who would benefit from these devices. .

Retroperitoneal Laparoscopic-Assisted Retrieval of Wall-Penetrating Inferior Vena Cava Filter After Endovascular Techniques Failed: An Initial Clinical Outcome

BACKGROUND

Inferior vena cava (IVC) filters are commonly used in China to prevent pulmonary embolisms in patients with deep vein thrombosis. However, IVC filter removal is complicated when the filter has penetrated the IVC wall and endovascular techniques usually fail. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of retroperitoneal laparoscopic-assisted retrieval of wall-penetrating IVC filters after endovascular techniques have failed.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We retrospectively evaluated a series of 8 patients who underwent retroperitoneal laparoscopic-assisted retrieval of a wall-penetrating IVC filter between December 2017 and November 2019. All patients had experienced at least 1 failure with endovascular retrieval before the study. The filters were slanted and the proximal retrieval hooks penetrated the posterior lateral IVC wall in all patients on computed tomography. Demographic information, operation parameters, and complications were recorded and analyzed. All patients were followed up for at least 12 months.

RESULTS

The procedure was successful in all patients. The median surgery time was 53.6 ± 12.7 min and the average blood loss was 45.0 ± 13.5 ml. No serious complication occurred during the patients' hospitalization, which was an average of 6.4 days. The median follow-up time was 15.1 months, and no patient had deep vein thrombosis recurrence.

CONCLUSIONS

Retroperitoneal laparoscopic-assisted retrieval is a feasible and effective technique, particularly when proximal retrieval hooks penetrate the posterior lateral wall of the IVC after endovascular techniques have failed. To some extent, the development of this technique at our institution has increased the success rate of filter removal and improved patient satisfaction.

The wire loop technique for IVC filter removal

Inferior vena cava (IVC) filters are effective therapy to prevent pulmonary embolism in patients with contraindication to anticoagulation. However, IVC wall penetration by the filter struts is a common complication that can lead to symptoms specially when adjacent organs are impacted. This case report and video describe the wire loop technique for successful endovascular IVC filter retrieval in a patient with lower back pain caused by a spinal strut penetration. The patient's back pain resolved after filter retrieval and he remained stable on anticoagulation with no recurrence of venous thromboembolism.

Excimer Laser Sheath-Assisted Retrieval of "Closed-Cell" Design Inferior Vena Cava Filters

Background Numerous reports have shown that inferior vena cava filters are associated with clinically significant adverse events. Complicating factors, such as caval incorporation, may lead to technical challenges at retrieval. The use of advanced techniques including the laser sheath have increased technical success rates; however, the data are limited on which filter types necessitate and benefit from its use. Methods and Results From October 2011 to September 2019, patients with inferior vena cava filter dwell times >6 months or with prior failed retrievals were considered for laser sheath-assisted retrieval. Standard and nonlaser advanced retrieval techniques were attempted first; if the filter could not be safely or successfully detached from the caval wall using these techniques, the laser sheath was used. Technical success, filter type, necessity for laser sheath application based on "open" versus "closed-cell" filter design, dwell times, and adverse events were evaluated. A total of 441 patients (216 men; mean age, 54 years) were encountered. Mean dwell times for all filters was 56.6 months, 54.4 among closed-cell filters and 58.5 among open-cell filters (P=0.63). Technical success of retrieval was 98%, with the laser sheath required in 143 cases (40%). Successful retrieval of closed-cell filters required laser sheath assistance in 60% of cases as compared with 7% of open-cell filters (odds ratio, 20.1; P<0.01). In closed-cell inferior vena cava filters, dwell time was significantly associated with need for laser, requiring it in 64% of retrievals with dwell times >6 months (P=0.01). One major adverse event occurred among laser sheath retrievals when a patient required a 2-day inpatient admission for a femoral access site hemorrhage. Conclusions Closed-cell filters may necessitate the use of the laser sheath for higher rates of successful and safe retrieval.

Procedural complications of inferior vena cava filter retrieval, an illustrated review

Annually, approximately 65,000 inferior vena cava (IVC) filters are placed in the United States (Ahmed et al., J Am Coll Radiol 15:1553-1557, 2018). Approximately 35% of filters are eventually retrieved (Angel et al., J Vasc Interv Radiol 22: 1522-1530 e1523, 2011). Complications during filter retrieval depend heavily on technique and filter position. In this paper, we review risk factors and incidence of complications during IVC filter removal. We also discuss ways these complications could be avoided and the appropriate management if they occur.

A 7-year retrospective review of the technical success of the "low-profile" hangman technique for complicated inferior vena cava (IVC) filter retrievals

PURPOSE

We aimed to assess the safety and effectiveness of a modified low-profile hangman technique.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective review of all filter retrieval procedures performed at a major trauma center, from 2012 to 2019. Records were reviewed for patient demographics, device type, device dwell time, device tilt, embedded hook, success of device retrieval, evidence of caval injury and occurrence of complications.

RESULTS

From 2012 to 2019 there were 473 filter retrieval attempts. An advanced technique was documented in 66 (14%). The low-profile hangman technique alone was documented in 23 procedures (5% of all procedures, 35% of advanced technique procedures). Average screening time was 28 minutes. At the time of retrieval attempt, 9 patients (41%) were anticoagulated. The hangman technique was employed as isolated maneuver in 23 patients and was successful on initial attempt in 22 cases (96%). The average dwell time of filters retrieved by the hangman technique was 228 days (range, 40-903 days; median, 196 days). No procedure-related complications occurred.

CONCLUSION

The retrieval of IVC filters is an important part of offering an IVC filter service. Advanced techniques to retrieve caval filters are multiple, and the risk of complications is increased in these cases. We demonstrate the safety and effectiveness of a new modified and lower-profile hangman technique. This new technique could be performed with only an 11 French venous access sheath using off-the-shelf equipment and it remains a cost-effective approach to complex filter retrieval.

Successful multi-step catheter intervention for thrombotic inferior vena cava filter retrieval

A 45-year-old man, who was implanted with an inferior vena cava (IVC) filter in his infrarenal IVC, had a complication of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) propagation from the IVC, beyond the IVC filter, to the right calf and left external iliac veins. The entire IVC filter was covered with a massive thrombus. We first decided to retrieve the IVC filter itself, which was suspected of causing metallic allergy. The thrombotic IVC filter was successfully retrieved using multi-step catheter intervention. To our knowledge, this is the first case report to describe successful multi-step catheter intervention for retrieval of an IVC filter covered with a massive thrombus. <Learning objectives: Inferior vena cava (IVC) filter thrombosis is one of the most serious IVC filter complications. It is difficult to retrieve the IVC filter covered with a massive thrombus. Multi-step catheter intervention technique may be useful to retrieve an IVC filter with thrombotic occlusion.>.

The role of an IVC filter retrieval clinic-A single center retrospective analysis

Background:

Inferior vena cava (IVC) filter placement still plays an essential role in preventing pulmonary embolism (PE) in patients with contraindications to anticoagulant therapy. However, IVC filter placement does have long-term risks which may be mitigated by retrieving them as soon as clinically acceptable. A dedicated IVC filter clinic provides a potential means of assuring adequate follow-up and retrieval.

Aim:

To assess the efficacy of our Inferior vena cava (IVC) filter retrieval clinic at improving the rate of patient follow-up, effective filter management, and retrieval rates.

Materials and Methods:

During the period of August 2017 through July 2018, 70 IVC filters were placed at our institution, and these patients were automatically enrolled into our IVC filter retrieval clinic for quarterly follow-up. We retrospectively reviewed data including appropriateness for removal at 3 months, overall retrieval rates, removal technique(s) employed, and technical success.

Results:

62.9% of the potentially retrievable filters were removed during the study period. The technical success of extraction, using a combination of standard and advanced techniques, was 91.7%. Overall, 15% of the patients were lost to follow-up.

Conclusion:

Our findings add to the growing body of literature to support the need for a robust IVC filter retrieval clinic to ensure adequate follow-up and timely retrieval of IVC filters.

Forceps-assisted Removal of Difficult-to-Retrieve Filters: Preliminary Results

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study is to retrospectively evaluate the safety and effectiveness of forceps-assisted removal of difficult-to-retrieve filters.

METHODS

Patients who underwent forceps-assisted removal of difficult-to-retrieve filters (filters that could not be successfully removed with the standard loop-snare technique) between February 2008 and February 2019 were included in this study. Patients underwent forceps-assisted filter removal either immediately after failed loop-snare removal (same procedure) or at a later time (separate procedure). Data regarding success rate, X-ray exposure time, and complications were recorded.

RESULTS

A total of 27 patients (14 men, 13 women; mean age 57.9 ± 12.6 years) were included in this study. The mean indwelling time of the filters was 10.9 ± 10.7 months. All filters were successfully removed. The mean X-ray exposure time was 25.9 ± 12.7 min (range 8-55) for all patients; the mean X-ray exposure times were 10.2 ± 2.3 min (range 8-14) for the 5 patients who underwent forceps-assisted filter removal in a separate procedure and 29.5 ± 11.2 min (range 15-55) for the 22 patients who underwent forceps-assisted filter removal immediately after failure of the loop-snare technique (P < 0.001). Two patients (8.3%) experienced extravasation of contrast material and needed no additional treatment. No major complications occurred.

CONCLUSIONS

Forceps-assisted filter retrieval can be used to safely and effectively remove difficult-to-retrieve filters.

A Modified Loop Snare Technique for Difficult Retrievals of Inferior Vena Cava Filter and Migrated Coil

The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of a modified loop snare technique for retrieval of difficult inferior vena cava (IVC) filters and migrated coils.A retrospective review of Günther Tulip filter retrievals between January 2014 and February 2017 was performed. A total of 316 IVC filter retrievals were attempted. In 25 cases, the standard technique had failed and our modified loop snare technique was subsequently attempted in 21 of these patients.The retrievals were successful in 20 cases (mean dwell time, 42.6 days, range, 14-102 days). The dwell time of the one failure was 46 days. The retrieval rate increased from 92.1% with the standard technique to 98.4% with the combination of the standard and modified loop snare technique. Unsuccessful retrieval was due to migration and endothelialization of the filter. This technique can also be used to remove migrated coils which cannot be captured by standard techniques. There were no complications from the retrievals.Tilt and endothelialization of filters are the main factors resulting in unsuccessful retrievals with the standard technique. In the present study, we describe an alternative technique for difficult IVC filter retrievals, which can also be used to capture migrated coils and occluders in the aorta and heart.

Multi loop snare technique for difficult inferior vena cava filter retrievals

Introduction

Use of optional vena cava filters has steadily increased. In the majority of cases removal is successful using standard techniques. In cases of tilting and migration of the filter however, more advanced techniques are necessary. The "loop-snare" technique has been described for such cases. Difficulties arise when the loop starts to slip around the legs and arms of the filter.

New technique

We present an improved loop-snare technique which allows to retrieve IVC filters when the simple loop-snare technique fails. We used additional loops, in one case one additional loop in another case two additional loops around the filter tip which allowed successful retrieval. The additional loops were created with a reversed shaped catheter. All guidewires were then engaged with a snare and pulled into a large sheath. The additional loops stabilize the tip and the filter can be pulled into the sheath.

Conclusion

The "multiple-loop-snare" technique is a refinement of the previously described "single loop-snare" technique and can be used when one loop fails.

Defining Prolonged Dwell Time: When Are Advanced Inferior Vena Cava Filter Retrieval Techniques Necessary? An Analysis in 762 Procedures

BACKGROUND

Despite growth in placement of retrievable inferior vena cava filters, retrieval rates remain low. Filters with extended implantation times present a challenge to retrieval, where standard techniques often fail. The development of advanced retrieval techniques has positively impacted retrieval of retrievable inferior vena cava filters with prolonged dwell times; however, there is no precise definition of the time point when advanced techniques become necessary. We aim to define prolonged retrievable inferior vena cava filters dwell time by determining the inflection point when the risk of standard retrieval technique failure increases significantly, necessitating advanced retrieval techniques to maintain overall technical success of retrieval.

METHODS AND RESULTS

From January 2009 to April 2015, 762 retrieval procedures were identified from a prospectively acquired database. We assessed patient age/sex, filter dwell time, procedural technical success, the use of advanced techniques, and procedure-related adverse events. Overall retrieval success rate was 98% (n=745). When standard retrieval techniques failed, advanced techniques were used; this was necessary 18% of the time (n=138). Logistic regression identified that dwell time was the only risk factor for failure of standard retrieval technique (odds ratio, 1.08; 95% confidence interval, 1.05-1.10; P<0.001). Spline function regression analysis demonstrated that if dwell time exceeded 7 months, the risk of standard technique failure was 40.9%. Adverse events occurred at a rate of 2% (n=18; 15 minor and 3 major).

CONCLUSIONS

The necessity of advanced techniques to maintain technical success of retrieval increases with dwell time. Patients with retrievable inferior vena cava filters in place beyond 7 months may benefit from referral to centers with expertise in advanced filter retrieval.

Endovascular retrieval of Greenfield IVC filters 13 and 19 years post placement without major complication

Inferior vena cava (IVC) filters were first introduced in 1967 by Kazi Mobin-Uddin and later improved by Lazar Greenfield in the 1980s becoming a major component of catastrophic pulmonary embolism prevention. Nevertheless, filters are not entirely harmless. The long term risks include caval thrombosis, visceral penetration, and filters can serve as a nidus for infection. Filter retrieval is often complicated by intimal hyperplasia especially with increased indwelling time. Historically, Greenfield filters in place for longer than 3 weeks were considered permanent due to the risks of retrieval. Herein we present 2 cases of successful retrieval of Greenfield filters 13 and 19 years post implantation.

Retrievable IVC Filters: Comprehensive Review of Device-related Complications and Advanced Retrieval Techniques

Use of retrievable inferior vena cava filters (RIVCFs) has grown exponentially since their introduction into clinical practice, but many of these devices are not retrieved. Some are not retrieved due to poor clinical follow-up, but other devices remain in situ for extended periods because they present significant technical challenges during retrieval. Because of these and other factors, many of these devices were thus left in place permanently. However, recent data have placed a renewed emphasis on device retrieval due to increased risk of RIVCF-related complications, which are positively correlated with filter dwell time. Development of advanced filter retrieval techniques has had a significant impact on the removal of embedded RIVCFs, permitting retrieval of the majority of devices. The purpose of this article is to present an imaging and data review of the dominant device-related factors that complicate RIVCF retrieval and to describe the relevant advanced retrieval techniques to manage these factors. RIVCF imaging is frequently encountered in daily clinical practice via various imaging modalities. Therefore, diagnostic radiologists can play a vital role in identifying filter-related issues. Familiarity with the context for managing these issues in the interventional suite is essential for improving triage and care of patients with RIVCFs. ^© RSNA, 2017.

Bidirectional Pull-Back Technique for Retrieval of Strut-Embedded Cylinder-Shaped Filters in Inferior Vena Cava

BACKGROUND IVC filters have been widely accepted as an effective method to prevent pulmonary embolism (PE) in patients with deep venous thrombosis (DVT). However, the placement of IVC filters is associated with significant complications and filter retrieval can be challenging when the filter struts are embedded into the caval wall. MATERIAL AND METHODS Over 26 months, we reviewed the safety and efficacy of the bidirectional pull-back technique for removing strut-embedded IVC filters in 15 consecutive patients. Retrieval procedural data such as in-dwell time, retrieval time, and fluoroscopy time were recorded. Clinical outcomes and procedure-related complications were evaluated by venography or enhanced computed tomography. Histologic tissue was analyzed to reveal the pathologic effects of chronic filter implantation. All patients underwent routine clinical follow-up at a mean time of 12 months (range, 8-14 months). RESULTS Technical success of filter retrieval was achieved in 100%, with mean implantation of 46.6 days (range, 27-66 days). Filter types were as follows: OptEase (n=11) and Aegisy (n=4). The mean retrieval time and fluoroscopy time were 21.43±5.42 min and 7.63±2.67 min, respectively. Immediate postprocedure venography showed no procedure-related complications. Thirteen patients discontinued previously prescribed lifelong anticoagulation. There were no long-term complications during follow-up. CONCLUSIONS The bidirectional pull-back technique is safe and efficient for filter retrieval. This complex technique can be particularly useful in selected patients to remove strut-embedded cylindrical-shaped IVC filters previously considered irretrievable.

Novel and Advanced Techniques for Complex IVC Filter Retrieval

OPINION STATEMENT

Inferior vena cava (IVC) filter placement is indicated for the treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in patients with a contraindication to or a failure of anticoagulation. With the advent of retrievable IVC filters and their ease of placement, an increasing number of such filters are being inserted for prophylaxis in patients at high risk for VTE. Available data show that only a small number of these filters are retrieved within the recommended period, if at all, prompting the FDA to issue a statement on the need for their timely removal. With prolonged dwell times, advanced techniques may be needed for filter retrieval in up to 60% of the cases. In this article, we review standard and advanced IVC filter retrieval techniques including single-access, dual-access, and dissection techniques. Complicated filter retrievals carry a non-negligible risk for complications such as filter fragmentation and resultant embolization of filter components, venous pseudoaneurysms or stenoses, and breach of the integrity of the caval wall. Careful pre-retrieval assessment of IVC filter position, any significant degree of filter tilting or of hook, and/or strut epithelialization and caval wall penetration by filter components should be considered using dedicated cross-sectional imaging for procedural planning. In complex cases, the risk for retrieval complications should be carefully weighed against the risks of leaving the filter permanently indwelling. The decision to remove an embedded IVC filter using advanced techniques should be individualized to each patient and made with caution, based on the patient's age and existing comorbidities.

Inferior vena cava filter retrievals, standard and novel techniques

The placement of an inferior vena cava (IVC) filter is a well-established management strategy for patients with venous thromboembolism (VTE) disease in whom anticoagulant therapy is either contraindicated or has failed. IVC filters may also be placed for VTE prophylaxis in certain circumstances. There has been a tremendous growth in placement of retrievable IVC filters in the past decade yet the majority of the devices are not removed. Unretrieved IVC filters have several well-known complications that increase in frequency as the filter dwell time increases. These complications include caval wall penetration, filter fracture or migration, caval thrombosis and an increased risk for lower extremity deep vein thrombosis (DVT). Difficulty is sometimes encountered when attempting to retrieve indwelling filters, mainly because of either abnormal filter positioning or endothelization of filter components that are in contact with the IVC wall, thereby causing the filter to become embedded. The length of time that a filter remains indwelling also impacts the retrieval rate, as increased dwell times are associated with more difficult retrievals. Several techniques for difficult retrievals have been described in the medical literature. These techniques range from modifications of standard retrieval techniques to much more complex interventions. Complications related to complex retrievals are more common than those associated with standard retrieval techniques. The risks of complex filter retrievals should be compared with those of life-long anticoagulation associated with an unretrieved filter, and should be individualized. This article summarizes current techniques for IVC filter retrieval from a clinical point of view, with an emphasis on advanced retrieval techniques.

Retrieval of Inferior Vena Cava Filters: Technical Considerations

Placement of retrievable inferior vena cava filters has seen rapid growth since their introduction into clinical practice. When retrieved, these devices offer the notional benefit of temporary protection from pulmonary embolism related to lower extremity deep venous thrombosis, and mitigation of filter-related deep venous thrombosis. When promptly removed after the indication for mechanical prophylaxis is no longer present, standard endovascular retrieval techniques are frequently successful. However, the majority of these devices are left in place for extended periods of time, which has been associated with greater device-related complications when left in situ, and failure of standard techniques when retrieval is attempted. The development of advanced retrieval techniques has had a positive impact on retrieval of these embedded devices. In this article, technical considerations in the retrieval of such devices, with an emphasis on advanced techniques to facilitate retrieval of embedded devices, are discussed.

Retrievable inferior vena cava filters can always be removed using "fall-back" techniques

OBJECTIVE

Retrievable inferior vena cava filters (IVCFs) left in place for a prolonged period can lead to complications including filter migration, fracture, and caval thrombosis. "Fall-back" techniques for IVCF retrieval that can be used when standard snaring is unsuccessful have been recently described. The purpose of this study was to analyze how incorporation of these new techniques affected the outcomes of IVCF retrievals at our institution during the past 5 years.

METHODS

Data were collected of all patients undergoing IVCF removal by vascular surgeons at a tertiary academic medical center between 2009 and 2013, including demographics and procedural and filter characteristics. A standard technique of snaring the retrieval hook was attempted first in all cases; if this was unsuccessful, a number of fall-back techniques were employed, including the use of endoscopic graspers, 18F sheaths, and snaring a second wire below the collar of the filter to collapse it into the sheath.

RESULTS

IVCF retrieval was attempted in 275 patients; 3 were excluded intraoperatively because of thrombus in the filter. Most filters (97%) were Günther Tulips (Cook Medical, Bloomington, Ind); 70% had been placed prophylactically before bariatric surgery. A total of 268 filters (98.5%) were retrieved successfully, 213 (79%) by standard snaring and 55 (21%) with fall-back techniques. In patients undergoing fall-back techniques, technical success was achieved 100% of the time. The median time since insertion was significantly longer in the fall-back group (173 days vs 83 days; P < .0001). Four intraoperative complications occurred; fractured wires embolized to the right atrium or pulmonary artery and were successfully removed endovascularly. The majority of the procedures (80%) were performed under sedation in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Incorporation of fall-back techniques may allow 100% technically successful and safe removal of retrievable IVCFs and is especially useful in removing filters with prolonged dwell time.

Iliac Vein Stent Fracture Due to a Migrated Retrievable Vena Cava Filter

We report a case of iliac vein stent fracture due to hooking by a migrated retrievable inferior vena cava filter in a 55-year-old woman with acute deep venous thrombosis related to May-Thurner syndrome.

Retrievable Filter Update: The Denali Vena Cava Filter

Over the past decade, there has been a gradual evolution of the retrievable inferior vena cava (IVC) filter, as the indications for caval filtration have expanded since the first such filters came into use. However, the particular design of retrievable or optional filters has introduced a subset of both symptomatic and asymptomatic device failures that have prompted a reassessment in the approach to patient selection as well as a new lexicon of technical considerations when considering retrieval. The Denali Vena Cava Filter (Bard Peripheral Vascular, Inc., Tempe, AZ) represents one of the latest filters to come to market that specifically addresses the various issues of its predecessors. While the body of published experience with this filter is still relatively sparse, the incidence of filter tilt, strut perforation, strut fracture, and filter migration appears acceptably low and the filters remain relatively easy to retrieve even after long dwell times.

The CIRSE Retrievable IVC Filter Registry: Retrieval Success Rates in Practice

CIRSE established a registry of retrievable filter use with the primary aim of determining the success of IVC Filter retrieval and associated complications. Secondary endpoints included filter indications, imaging strategies before retrieval, filter dwell times, and anticoagulation status. A web-based electronic registry was hosted between 01/12/2010 and 30/06/2012. Data entry occurred at the date of IVC filter retrieval and included items such as filter type, indication for filter insertion, access route, dwell time, retrieval success, complications, reasons for failed retrieval, and anticoagulation status. 671 filter retrievals were entered (male:female 333:295, mean age 55, median 57). Retrieval data were not entered in 43/671 leaving 628 patients for analysis. The 4 commonest retrievable filters used were the Celect in 182 patients, the OPTEASE in 161, ALN in 120, and Gunther Tulip in 98. Filters were inserted for absolute indications 40%, relative indications in 31%, and prophylactic in 24%, with 5% missing. Mean filter dwell time was 90 days. Filters were successfully retrieved in 576/628 patients (92%). The mean dwell time for successful retrievals was 85 days versus 145 days for unsuccessful retrievals (p = 0.001). Major complications occurred in 2 patients (0.03%). In summary, the CIRSE retrievable filter registry demonstrates a retrieval rate of 92% across a range of filter types, with a low major complication rate, reflecting current practice. There is an increase in trend of retrievable filter use for relative and prophylactic indications.

Failed inferior vena cava filter retrieval by conventional method: Analysis of its causes and retrieval of it by modified double-loop technique

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the complications of the temporary implanted inferior vena cava (IVC) filter and the feasibility of double-loop technique for removal of complicated IVC filters.

METHODS

From January 2012 to December 2013, a total of 25 patients with IVC filter were referred for IVC filter retrieval. There were 20 Celect®, 3 OptEase®, and 2 Günther-Tulip® filters. All of the patients were evaluated with a pre-procedural CT scan to identify any complications. The IVC filters which had failed to be retrieved by the conventional method were evaluated, and retrieval was attempted with double loop technique.

RESULTS

Sixteen of 25 (64%) filters had complications; IVC wall penetration (n = 11, 44%), tilted within IVC (n = 6, 24%), embedded struts (n = 3, 12%), and fracture of the strut (n = 1, 4%). The complications were overlapped in five patients. Two of them (8%) had also complained of filter-related pain. The success rate of IVC filter retrieval by double-loop technique was 14/16 (87.5%). There was no major filter retrieval-related complications.

CONCLUSIONS

The double-loop technique is a safe and feasible method for complicated IVC filter retrieval.