Role of prophylactic temporary inferior vena cava filters placed at the ICU bedside under intravascular ultrasound guidance in patients with multiple trauma

Value of interventional radiology and their contributions to modern medical systems

Interventional radiology (IR) is a unique specialty that incorporates a diverse set of skills ranging from imaging, procedures, consultation, and patient management. Understanding how IR generates value to the healthcare system is important to review from various perspectives. IR specialists need to understand how to meet demands from various stakeholders to expand their practice improving patient care. Thus, this review discusses the domains of value contributed to medical systems and outlines the parameters of success. IR benefits five distinct parties: patients, practitioners, payers, employers, and innovators. Value to patients and providers is delivered through a wide set of diagnostic and therapeutic interventions. Payers and hospital systems financially benefit from the reduced cost in medical management secondary to fast patient recovery, outpatient procedures, fewer complications, and the prestige of offering diverse expertise for complex patients. Lastly, IR is a field of rapid innovation implementing new procedural technology and techniques. Overall, IR must actively advocate for further growth and influence in the medical field as their value continues to expand in multiple domains. Despite being a nascent specialty, IR has become indispensable to modern medical practice.

Inferior Vena Cava Filters and Complications: A Systematic Review

Inferior vena cava (IVC) filters have been used since the 1960s to treat patients with acute risk of pulmonary embolism (PE) to prevent migration of thrombus by trapping it within the filter. Traditional usage has been in patients with contraindication to anticoagulation that carry a significant mortality risk. In this systematic review, we sought to evaluate complications associated with placement of inferior vena cava filters based on published data from the past 20 years. A search was performed on October 6th, 2022, in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines for systematic reviews, using three databases (ProQuest, PubMed and ScienceDirect) for articles published between the dates of February 1, 2002 and October 1, 2022. Results were filtered to include full-text, clinical studies, and randomized trials written in English pertaining to keywords "IVC filter AND complications", "Inferior Vena Cava Filter AND complications", "IVC filter AND thrombosis" and "Inferior Vena Cava Filter AND thrombosis". Articles identified by the three databases were pooled and further screened for relevance based on inclusion and exclusion criteria. Initial search results yielded 33,265 hits from all three databases combined. Screening criteria were applied, with 7721 results remaining. After further manual screening, including removal of duplicate hits, a total of 117 articles were selected for review. While there are no consensus guidelines for best practice, there is compelling evidence that IVC filters can provide significant protection against PE with minimal complications if the treatment window is appropriate. Increase in the variety of filter models has led to broader availability, but skepticism remains about their efficacy and safety, with ongoing controversy surrounding appropriate indications. Further research is needed to establish clear guidelines on appropriate indications for IVC placement and to determine time course of complications versus benefits for indwelling filters.

Inferior vena cava filter retrievals using advanced techniques: a systematic review

This study aimed to assess the safety of complex inferior vena cava (IVC) filter retrieval techniques through a systematic review of published literature. Using PubMed, a systematic review was conducted in line with the 2020 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis guidelines to identify articles published through April 2020 that reported on complex IVC filter retrieval techniques in >5 patients. Case reports, review papers, and studies that did not report on primary outcomes or variables of interest were excluded. Risk of bias was assessed using a modified Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment scale. Pooled success and complication rates were calculated for the overall number of complex retrieval attempts as well as for each filter type and each complex retrieval method. Sixteen fair-quality and three good-quality studies met the inclusion criteria, with 758 patients (428 female) who had undergone 770 advanced retrieval attempts. The mean age of the patients was 46.5 ± 7.1 years (range: 14.1-90), and the mean dwell time was 602.5 ± 388.6 days (range: 5-7336). Regarding filters, 92.6% (702/758) were retrievable and 7.4% (56/758) were permanent. Indications for complex retrieval included the failure of standard retrieval (89.2%; 676/758) and tilting or embedding in the caval wall (53.8%; 408/758); 92.6% (713/770) of the advanced retrieval attempts were successful. The pooled success rate was 92.0% (602/654) for retrievable filters and 96.4% (53/55) for permanent filters (P = 0.422). Only 2.8% (21/758) of patients experienced major complications, and the major complication rate was not significantly associated with filter type (P = 0.183). Advanced techniques for IVC filter retrieval appear safe for the retrieval of retrievable filters and certain permanent filters, with a low short-term major complication rate. Further studies on complex retrieval techniques used to remove permanent filters should be conducted to clarify their safety with respect to filter type.

Comparative outcomes of Inferior Vena Cava filters placed at bedside using digital radiography versus conventional fluoroscopy

Purpose

To retrospectively assess the outcomes of Inferior Vena Cava (IVC) filters placed in critically ill patients in the ICU at bedside using digital radiograph (DR) guidance with previous cross-sectional imaging for planning, compared to IVC filters placed by conventional fluoroscopy (CF).

Method and materials

The cohort consisted of 129 IVC filter placements; 48 placed at bedside and 81 placed conventionally from July 2015 to September 2016. Patient demographics, indication, radiation exposures, access site, procedural duration, dwell time, and complications were identified by the EMR. IVC Filter positioning with measurements of tip to renal vein distance and lateral filter tilt were performed when cavograms or post placement CTs were available for review. Statistical analysis was performed using Stata IC 11.2.

Results

Technical success of the procedure was 100% in both groups. Procedural duration was longer at the bedside lasting 14.5 +/- 10.2 versus 6.7 +/- 6.0 ​min (p<0.0001). The bedside DR group had a median radiation exposure of 25 ​mGy (15–35) and the CF group had mean radiation exposure of 256.94 ​mGy +/- 158.6. There was no significant difference in distance of IVC tip to renal vein (p=0.31), mispositioning (p=0.59), degree of filter tilt (p=0.33), or rate of complications (p=0.65) between the two groups.

Conclusion

IVCF placement at the bedside using DR is comparable to CF with no statistical difference in outcomes based on IVCF positioning, degree of lateral tilt or removal issues. It decreased radiation dose, but with overall increased procedural time.

Feasibility study of hand-carried ultrasound-guided retrievable inferior vena cava filter placement

Background

With the development of ultrasonic diagnostic techniques in recent years, ultrasound-guided placement of inferior vena cava (IVC) filters has been widely used in clinics, and satisfactory results have been achieved. Our study aims to observe the accuracy of hand-carried ultrasound-guided retrievable vena cava filter placement, evaluate the feasibility and safety of this new method, and provide a scientific and effective interventional method and clinical data to prevent acute pulmonary embolism (PE) after battle injury of limbs.

Methods

Two hundred patients with post-traumatic thrombosis of the extremities were enrolled. The renal vein was located under the guidance of hand-carried ultrasound. The retrievable filter was fixed 1–2 cm below the opening of the renal vein. The self-expanding filter was used after the filter’s position was confirmed by injecting the contrast agent under the digital subtraction angiography (DSA) fluoroscopy.

Results

All the 200 patients underwent the operation successfully. The position of the hand-carried ultrasound localizer was consistent with the DSA localizer. All the filters were expanded smoothly. No complications related to the operation occurred.

Conclusions

The study concluded that the hand-carried ultrasound-guided retrievable vena cava filter placement has a high success rate and can prevent acute PE after limbs’ battle injury.

Intravascular ultrasound in the diagnosis and treatment of central venous diseases

Intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) has been used extensively in coronary applications. Its use in venous applications has increased as endovascular therapy has increasingly become the mainstay therapy for central venous diseases. IVUS has been used for both diagnostic and therapeutic purposes in managing venous stenotic disease, venous occlusive disease, and IVC filter placement and removal. IVUS has been proven to be effective in providing detailed measurement of the venous anatomy, which aid in determining the appropriate size and the approach for venous stent placement. In IVC filter placement, IVUS can provide detailed measurement and guide IVC filter placement in emergent and critical care settings. It also has certain utility in filter removal. At any rate, to date there are only a few studies examining its impact on patient outcomes. Prospective randomized controlled trials are warranted in the future.

Venous thromboembolism after delayed surgery for a hip fracture: A retrospective cohort study

AIM

The purpose of this study was to investigate the demographic characteristics and prevalence of postoperative venous thromboembolism (VTE) in delayed hip fracture patients referred to our hospital (a tertiary referral center), and further verify the effect of intensive prophylaxis protocol in preventing the occurrence of VTE.

METHODS

We retrospectively evaluated 264 hip fracture patients whose surgery was delayed by >24 h. The patients were divided into two groups, according to the VTE prophylaxis protocol (conventional vs intensive). We evaluated the time from injury to surgery, and analyzed the prevalence of postoperative symptomatic VTE between the groups. The patient outcome measures, including in-hospital mortality and 30-day-mortality after hip surgery, were also evaluated.

RESULTS

The mean time from injury to operation was 127.4 h (95% confidence interval 92.2-162.7 h). The incidence of postoperative symptomatic VTE was 5.9% in the conventional prophylaxis group and 0.8% in the intensive prophylaxis group. The intensive prophylaxis group had a significantly lower incidence of postoperative VTE (P = 0.036). Eight patients with deep vein thrombosis on preoperative screening who underwent inferior vena cava filter insertion did not develop postoperative symptomatic VTE. Logistic regression analysis results also showed that the protocol statistically reduced the development of VTE (odds ratio 0.14, 95% CI 0.02-1.21, P = 0.042).

CONCLUSIONS

Delayed hip fracture surgery resulted in a higher incidence of VTE in patients who received conventional prophylaxis; however, our intensive prophylaxis protocol successfully prevented postoperative symptomatic VTE, including pulmonary embolism. Geriatr Gerontol Int 2020; 20: 1151-1156.

Inferior Vena Cava Filters: Current Indications, Techniques, and Recommendations

The vena cava filter (VCF) is intended to prevent the progression of deep venous thrombosis to pulmonary embolism. Recently, the indications for VCF placement have expanded, likely due in part to newer retrievable inferior vena caval filters and minimally invasive techniques. This article reviews the available VCFs, the indications for use, the techniques for placement, and possible outcomes and complications.

Total Knee Arthroplasty in a Diagnosed Case of Deep Vein Thrombosis - Our Experience and Review of Literature

INTRODUCTION

Deep vein thrombosis (DVT) following total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and its associated complication, pulmonary thromboembolism (PTE) remains a challenge for orthopedic surgeons. There are wide ranges of predisposing factors which are both patient specific as well as procedure associated, responsible for DVT. PTE is a well-known fatal complication of DVT which may be life-threatening. Medical management and early mobilization are necessary for the management of DVT. Fatal PTE can be prevented by implantation of inferior vena cava (IVC) filter in at risk patients.

CASE REPORT

We are presenting a rare case report of 75-year-old female with severe osteoarthritis of the left knee with DVT of the left lower limb in which TKA was done in a prediagnosed case of DVT. IVC filter placement was done before TKA for prevention of fatal PTE, and medical management was done for DVT.

CONCLUSION

Prevention of fatal thromboembolism is of prime importance in the management of DVT. This can be achieved by implanting IVC filter. TKA is necessary for early pain free mobilization of the patient, which prevents progression of DVT and early recovery. IVC filter placement prevents fatal thromboembolism. Hence, treatment of both osteoarthritis of knee by TKA and DVT can be done simultaneously.

Use of Prophylactic Inferior Vena Cava Filters in Trauma

Venous thromboembolisms, specifically pulmonary embolisms (PEs), represent a significant burden on healthcare systems worldwide, particularly within the setting of trauma. According to the literature, PEs are the most common cause of in-hospital death; however, this condition can be prevented with a variety of prophylactic and therapeutic measures. This article aimed to examine current evidence on the use, indications for prophylaxis, outcomes and complications of prophylactic inferior vena cava filters in trauma patients.

Inferior vena cava filter placement at bedside using computed tomography scan information: a new technique for accurate deployment

BACKGROUND

An inferior vena cava filter (IVCF) is indicated for the prophylaxis of pulmonary embolism where anticoagulation is contraindicated. The majority of these filters are placed using fluoroscopy and venogram. We hypothesized that a computed tomography (CT) scan of the abdomen and pelvis provides sufficient information for successful deployment of an IVCF at bedside without the need for any further imaging during the procedure.

METHODS

A retrospective review of prospectively collected data of a bedside IVCF placement technique using measurements from abdominal/pelvic CT scans without additional intraoperative imaging in 38 patients at a level 1 trauma center was conducted.

RESULTS

The most common indication for IVCF placement was high-risk patients without deep venous thrombosis. All these procedures were performed at bedside. Nonretrievable (TrapEase) and retrievable (OptEase) type filters were used. All these IVCFs were placed below the renal veins without any complications.

CONCLUSIONS

IVCFs can be placed based on measurements from abdominal CT scans without the need for further imaging such as fluoroscopy or an inferior vena cava venogram. This technique is as simple as bedside femoral venous line placement.

Systematic review of the use of retrievable inferior vena cava filters

PURPOSE

To review the available literature on retrievable inferior vena cava (IVC) filters to examine the effectiveness and risks of these devices.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Investigators searched MEDLINE for clinical trials evaluating retrievable filters and reviewed the complications reported to the Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience (MAUDE) database of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

RESULTS

Eligibility criteria were met by 37 studies comprising 6,834 patients. All of the trials had limitations, and no studies were randomized. There were 11 prospective clinical trials; the rest were retrospective studies. Despite the limitations of the evidence, the IVC filters seemed to be effective in preventing pulmonary embolism (PE); the rate of PE after IVC placement was 1.7%. The mean retrieval rate was 34%. Most of the filters became permanent devices. Multiple complications associated with the use of IVC filters were described in the reviewed literature or were reported to the MAUDE database; most of these were associated with long-term use (> 30 days). At the present time, the objective comparison data of different filter designs do not support superiority of any particular design.

CONCLUSIONS

In high-risk patients for whom anticoagulation is not feasible, retrievable IVC filters seem to be effective in preventing PE. Long-term complications are a serious concern with the use of these filters. The evidence of the effectiveness and the risks was limited by the small number of prospective studies.

Vena cava interruption

Anticoagulation has been proven to be effective in preventing and treating deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolus. However, many critically ill patients are unable to receive anticoagulation or suffer recurrent venous thromboembolism despite adequate treatment. This article examines the use of vena cava filters in the critically ill. Indications for, techniques, and complications of vena cava filter insertion are reviewed. The importance of vena cava filters with the option to be retrieved and bedside insertion in the intensive care unit is emphasized.

CT fluoroscopy-guided placement of inferior vena cava filters: feasibility study in pigs

PURPOSE

To evaluate the feasibility of computed tomography (CT)-guided placement of inferior vena cava (IVC) filters in a swine model.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Five domestic pigs (60-70 kg) underwent transfemoral and transjugular IVC filter placement under real-time CT fluoroscopic guidance. Filter position was confirmed by contrast-enhanced CT and digital subtraction angiography. Filter tilt, distance to target position, and fluoroscopy time were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 10 filters were successfully implanted (five via transfemoral approach, five via transjugular approach) without complications. The mean distance to the target position was 0.3 cm ± 0.2. Mean filter tilt was 3.2° ± 2.3 (range, 0°-7°), without differences between deployment techniques (P = .8486). Average fluoroscopy time was 25.9 s ± 6.9 per procedure.

CONCLUSIONS

CT fluoroscopy-guided placement of IVC filters is safely feasible. Use of this technique may avoid the need to move critically ill patients.

The use of paired optionally retrievable günther tulip filters in trauma patients with anatomical variants

Inferior vena cava (IVC) filtration is commonly performed to protect against pulmonary embolism in acutely injured patients with contraindications for anticoagulation therapy. Increasingly, optionally retrievable IVC filters are utilized, particularly in younger patients with longer life expectancies. There are well-described anatomical variants that preclude the typical infrarenal deployment of IVC filters. We describe three cases in which trauma patients with congenital anomalies required temporary prophylaxis with IVC filters. One patient had a duplication of the IVC requiring filter deployment in each IVC limb. The second patient had a low inserting accessory left renal vein, and a third patient had a megacava. Both of these patients required filter deployment in each common iliac vein. In each case, a pair of optionally retrievable Günther Tulip filters was deployed and subsequently retrieved.

Optional inferior vena cava filters in the trauma patient

Trauma patients are at exceedingly high risk of development of venous thromboembolism (VTE) including deep venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolism (PE). The epidemiology of VTE in trauma patients is reviewed. PE is thought to be the third major cause of death after trauma in those patients who survive longer than 24 hours after onset of injury. In fact, patients recovering from trauma have the highest rate of VTE among all subgroups of hospitalized patients. Various prophylactic and surveillance methods have been evaluated and found helpful in certain situations, but VTE complications can occur despite such measures. Therapeutic and prophylactic uses of inferior vena cava (IVC) filters in trauma patients are reviewed. Prophylactic IVC filter use is revealed to be a controversial subject with valid arguments on both sides of the issue. With the lack of prospective randomized trials of IVC filter use in trauma, it is impossible to make evidence-based recommendations. Unfortunately, two sets of guidelines are available for insertion of filters in trauma patients, with conflicting recommendations. The introduction of retrievable IVC filters seems to offer a unique solution for VTE protection in the trauma patient population, which often consists of younger members of our population. Lastly, current generations of FDA-approved retrieval filters are discussed.

Critical care of traumatic spinal cord injury

Approximately 11 000 people suffer traumatic spinal cord injury (TSCI) in the United States, each year. TSCI incidences vary from 13.1 to 52.2 per million people and the mortality rates ranged from 3.1 to 17.5 per million people. This review examines the critical care of TSCI. The discussion will focus on primary and secondary mechanisms of injury, spine stabilization and immobilization, surgery, intensive care management, airway and respiratory management, cardiovascular complication management, venous thromboembolism, nutrition and glucose control, infection management, pressure ulcers and early rehabilitation, pharmacologic cord protection, and evolving treatment options including the use of pluripotent stem cells and hypothermia.

Are IVC filters required in combat support hospitals?

BACKGROUND

Haemorrhagic shock from traumatic injuries is now often treated using a damage control resuscitation strategy that transfuses packed red blood cells, plasma and platelets in a 1:1:1 ratio, early use of activated recombinant factor VII and transfusion of fresh whole blood. These therapies are aimed at promoting thrombosis in injured vessels. Such patients are at high risk for thrombotic complications and thromboprophylaxis is necessary, but frequently impossible to use in the early phase of care.

CASE PRESENTATION

We describe the case of an Afghan civilian worker who suffered a vertical shear pelvic fracture with massive bleeding in a pedestrian/truck collision that was treated with a damage control resuscitation strategy, and who later suffered a severe pulmonary embolus. The potential use of a temporary inferior vena cava [IVC] filters is discussed.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Care providers and policy makers must recognize that the increased use of prothrombotic strategies of resuscitation will likely increase the incidence of thrombotic complications in the high risk population of severely injured patients in combat support hospitals. Monitoring the incidence of these complications and development of strategies for prevention and treatment are required to avoid undermining the positive outcomes of damage control resuscitation. These strategies could include supplying combat support hospitals with the equipment and training necessary for placement of temporary IVC filters under fluoroscopic guidance.

Obesity and the orthopedic trauma patient: a review of the risks and challenges in medical and surgical management

The medical and surgical care of obese trauma patients presents a variety of unique and important challenges. Over the past 30 years, this population has increased dramatically in number, and the optimization of their care demands the attention of the medical community. The problems of caring for an obese trauma patient begin before the actual traumatic event occurs due to their substantially higher incidence of serious comorbidities, such as diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and cardiopulmonary issues. In the setting of trauma, important considerations for the obese patient include careful and expeditious preoperative medical optimization; appropriate deep vein thrombosis prophylaxis; planning for and preventing operative and postoperative challenges (eg, pulmonary and wound complications); and ensuring adequate hospital equipment and staffing resources in the acute and rehabilitative phases of care. This article outlines the scope of the obesity epidemic, reviews the medical consequences of obesity, and highlights surgical considerations specific to the care of orthopedic injuries in the obese trauma patient.

Cost-effectiveness of guidelines for insertion of inferior vena cava filters in high-risk trauma patients

BACKGROUND

Inferior vena cava filters (IVCFs) can prevent pulmonary embolism (PE); however, indications for use vary. The Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma (EAST) 2002 guidelines suggest prophylactic IVCF use in high-risk patients, but the American College of Chest Physicians (ACCP) 2008 guidelines do not. This analysis compares cost-effectiveness of prophylactic vs therapeutic retrievable IVCF placement in high-risk trauma patients.

METHODS

Markov modeling was used to determine incremental cost-effectiveness of these guidelines in dollars per quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) during hospitalization and long-term follow-up. Our population was 46-year-old trauma patients at high risk for venous thromboembolism (VTE) by EAST criteria to whom either the EAST (prophylactic IVCF) or ACCP (no prophylactic IVCF) guidelines were applied. The analysis assumed the societal perspective over a lifetime. For base case and sensitivity analyses, probabilities and utilities were obtained from published literature and costs calculated from Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services fee schedules, the Healthcare Cost & Utilization Project database, and Red Book wholesale drug prices for 2007. For data unavailable from the literature, similarities to other populations were used to make assumptions.

RESULTS

In base case analysis, prophylactic IVCFs were more costly ($37,700 vs $37,300) and less effective (by 0.139 QALYs) than therapeutic IVCFs. In sensitivity analysis, the EAST strategy of prophylactic filter placement would become the preferred strategy in individuals never having a filter, with either an annual probability of VTE of ≥ 9.6% (base case, 5.9%), or a very high annual probability of anticoagulation complications of ≥ 24.3% (base case, 2.5%). The EAST strategy would also be favored if the annual probability of venous insufficiency was <7.69% (base case, 13.9%) after filter removal or <1.90% with a retained filter (base case, 14.1%). In initial hospitalization only, EAST guidelines were more costly by $2988 and slightly more effective by .0008 QALY, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $383,638/QALY.

CONCLUSIONS

Analysis suggests prophylactic IVC filters are not cost-effective in high-risk trauma patients. The magnitude of this result is primarily dependent on probabilities of long-term sequelae (venous thromboembolism, bleeding complications). Even in the initial hospitalization, however, prophylactic IVCF costs for the additional quality-adjusted life years gained did not justify use.

Deep vein thrombosis in major trauma

Major trauma patients are at increased risk of developing deep vein thrombosis (DVT). Certain injuries may be associated with an increased DVT risk, though definitive evidence regarding specific risk factors is lacking. The role of mechanical thromboprophylaxis in major trauma remains unclear and these methods are often contraindicated in lower limb injuries. Low molecular weight heparin is effective in reducing DVT frequency in major trauma with acceptable haemorrhagic complications. Evidence regarding the efficacy of thromboprophylaxis specifically in major trauma patients is lacking. However, recently published guidelines from the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence appear to make recommendations based on findings in other patient populations rather than using the best available evidence in major trauma patients. Future studies must identify specific DVT risk factors in major trauma to allow accurate risk stratification, determine the time period patients remain at increased DVT risk and establish the role of combined thromboprophylaxis.

Prospective implementation of an algorithm for bedside intravascular ultrasound-guided filter placement in critically ill patients

BACKGROUND

Although contrast venography is the standard imaging method for inferior vena cava (IVC) filter insertion, intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) imaging is a safe and effective option that allows for bedside filter placement and is especially advantageous for immobilized critically ill patients by limiting resource use, risk of transportation, and cost. This study reviewed the effectiveness of a prospectively implemented algorithm for IVUS-guided IVC filter placement in this high-risk population.

METHODS

Current evidence-based guidelines were used to create a clinical decision algorithm for IVUS-guided IVC filter placement in critically ill patients. After a defined lead-in phase to allow dissemination of techniques, the algorithm was prospectively implemented on January 1, 2008. Data were collected for 1 year using accepted reporting standards and a quality assurance review performed based on intent-to-treat at 6, 12, and 18 months.

RESULTS

As defined in the prospectively implemented algorithm, 109 patients met criteria for IVUS-directed bedside IVC filter placement. Technical feasibility was 98.1%. Only 2 patients had inadequate IVUS visualization for bedside filter placement and required subsequent placement in the endovascular suite. Technical success, defined as proper deployment in an infrarenal position, was achieved in 104 of the remaining 107 patients (97.2%). The filter was permanent in 21 (19.6%) and retrievable in 86 (80.3%). The single-puncture technique was used in 101 (94.4%), with additional dual access required in 6 (5.6%). Periprocedural complications were rare but included malpositioning requiring retrieval and repositioning in three patients, filter tilt >/=15 degrees in two, and arteriovenous fistula in one. The 30-day mortality rate for the bedside group was 5.5%, with no filter-related deaths.

CONCLUSIONS

Successful placement of IVC filters using IVUS-guided imaging at the bedside in critically ill patients can be established through an evidence-based prospectively implemented algorithm, thereby limiting the need for transport in this high-risk population.

Complications related to deep venous thrombosis prophylaxis in trauma: a systematic review of the literature

Deep venous thrombosis prophylaxis is essential to the appropriate management of multisystem trauma patients. Without thromboprophylaxis, the rate of venous thrombosis and subsequent pulmonary embolism is substantial. Three prophylactic modalities are common: pharmacologic anticoagulation, mechanical compression devices, and inferior vena cava filtration. A systematic review was completed using PRISMA guidelines to evaluate the potential complications of DVT prophylactic options. Level one evidence currently supports the use of low molecular weight heparins for thromboprophylaxis in the trauma patient. Unfortunately, multiple techniques are not infrequently required for complex multisystem trauma patients. Each modality has potential complications. The risks of heparin include bleeding and heparin induced thrombocytopenia. Mechanical compression devices can result in local soft tissue injury, bleeding and patient non-compliance. Inferior vena cava filters migrate, cause inferior vena cava occlusion, and penetrate the vessel wall. While the use of these techniques can be life saving, they must be appropriately utilized.

Günther Tulip and Celect IVC filters in multiple-trauma patients

PURPOSE

To evaluate results with the retrievable Günther Tulip (GT) and Celect inferior vena cava filters (IVCFs) placed at the intensive care unit (ICU) bedside under "real-time" intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) guidance in multiple-trauma patients.

METHODS

Between December 2004 and December 2008, 187 multiple-trauma patients (109 men; mean age 44+/-2 years, range 17-71) with contraindications to low-dose anticoagulation therapy or sequential compression devices had Günther Tulip (n = 97) or Celect (n = 90) retrievable IVCFs placed under real-time IVUS guidance. Günther Tulip filters were inserted using a "double-puncture" technique. The Celect IVCFs were placed with a simplified single-puncture technique in which the filter introducer sheath was advanced until the radiopaque tip "covered" the IVUS image of the renal vein, indicating that the filter sheath was in position for filter deployment. The 2 filter groups were compared on the endpoints of technical implantation success, retrievability, prevention of PE, and procedure-related deep vein thrombosis (DVT).

RESULTS

As verified by abdominal radiography, 93.1% (174/187) of IVCFs were placed without complications; 6 IVCFs (all GT; p = 0.03 versus Celect) were misplaced in the iliac vein but uneventfully retrieved and replaced in the IVC within 24 hours. Two insertion site femoral vein DVTs (both in the dual puncture group; p>0.2) and 5 groin hematomas occurred during follow-up. GT filters were in place a mean of 107 days and Celect 97 days. In this time, 2 pulmonary embolisms occurred (1 in each group; p>0.2). Of the 115 filters scheduled for retrieval (50 Günther Tulip, 65 Celect), 33 (23 Günther Tulip, 10 Celect) could not be retrieved (p = 0.0004). Vena cavography identified filter tilting (>20 degrees ) in 21 cases (15 GT, 6 Celect), while 12 filters (8 GT, 4 Celect) had extended indwell times (mean 187 days) and excessive tissue ingrowth covering the retrieval hook. Subjectively, the Celect filters were clinically "easier" to retrieve; they also had fewer cases of significant tilt (>20%) than the GT filters, but the difference was not statistically significant.

CONCLUSION

GT and Celect IVCFs placed at the ICU bedside under IVUS guidance in multiple-trauma patients was simple, safe, and avoided transporting critically ill patients out of the ICU. Further investigation of the single sheath IVUS technique and the role of retrievable IVCFs in multi-trauma patients is warranted.

Thromboprophylaxis after multiple trauma: what treatment and for how long?

A review of current literature discussing thromboprophylaxis in the multiple-trauma patient to provide insight on the type of treatment and its duration of use. AMEDLINE search was conducted in May 2009 using keywords associated with thromboprophylactic measures in multiple-trauma patient care, including inferior vena cava (IVC) filters, mechanical-compression devices and anticoagulants. Abstracts were evaluated for relevance to this study and full-text articles were then examined individually. Fourteen full text articles were evaluated including guidelines published by the American College of Chest Physicians (ACCP) and the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma (EAST) and other studies dealing with multiple-trauma patients, including those in hip-fracture surgery, lower-leg trauma and head trauma. Limited research has been performed for the multiple-trauma patient and recommendations regarding the type of treatment and its duration of use cannot be suggested beyond what has been extrapolated from existing trauma and major surgery patients. IVC filters, mechanical compression devices and anticoagulants therefore remain the standard, but their duration of use in the multiple-trauma patient is not well described. New oral anticoagulants that inhibit factor Xa or thrombin directly show promising qualities but have not been evaluated for multiple-trauma applications. Therefore, optimal thromboprophylaxis and its duration after multiple trauma is largely based on rational, clinical decision making on a case-by-case basis.

Crux vena cava filter

Inferior vena cava filters are widely accepted for pulmonary embolic prophylaxis in high-risk patients with contraindications to anticoagulation. While long-term complications have been associated with permanent filters, retrievable filters are now available and have resulted in the rapid expansion of this technology. Nonetheless, complications are still reported with optional filters. Furthermore, device tilting and thrombus load may prevent retrieval in up to 30% of patients, thereby eliminating the benefits of this technology. The Crux vena cava filter is a novel, self-centering, low-profile filter that is designed for ease of delivery, retrievability and improved efficacy while limiting fatigue-related device complications. This device has been proven safe and user-friendly in an ovine model and has recently been implanted in human subjects.

Retrievable vena cava filters: a clinical review

Vena cava filters were developed as a method of preventing pulmonary embolism (PE) in patients with venous thromboembolism (VTE) at risk for bleeding from therapeutic anticoagulation. However, the long-term complications of filter placement, such as caval thrombosis, have mitigated some of the benefits, particularly in those patients with only a temporary contraindication to anticoagulation. Retrievable filters were designed to avoid the long-term risks of a permanent filter while still providing short-term protection against PE. As a result, their use has expanded from patients with known thrombosis to those without VTE who are at high risk for developing PE. In this review, we discuss the different types of retrievable filters, indications for their placement, complications that can occur during and after placement, and their use as prophylaxis in surgical patients. Although the use of retrievable filters in patients with known VTE is clear, further studies are needed to establish their prophylactic efficacy in the surgical patient. Until this evidence is available, we recommend that retrievable filters should be used only in patients with acute VTE who are at risk for recurrent thromboembolism and have a transient risk for bleeding.

Intravascular Ultrasound—Guided Inferior Vena Cava Filter Placement in the Military Multitrauma Patients: A Single-Center Experience

Background: High velocity fragments have resulted in a multitude of complex injuries in the military patients, placing them at increased risk of venous thromboembolism. Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed of all the intravascular ultrasound (IVUS)-guided bedside inferior vena cava (IVC) filters placed between August 2003 and October 2007. Results: Fourteen patients had bedside IVUS-guided retrievable filter placement. Thirteen males and one female and the mean (+SD) injury severity scores (ISS) was 37.2 (+9.9). The most common causes of injury were explosive devices (57%), gunshot wounds (28%), rocket-propelled grenades (7%), and motor vehicle crashes (7%). Indications for filter insertion were deep venous thrombosis in 36% of patients and pulmonary embolus in 28%. Thirty five percent had filters inserted prophylactically. Conclusions: Military trauma population ISS is considerably higher than what is reported in the civilian population. The bedside IVUS-guided IVC filter insertion is particularly useful in this population.

Penetration of Günther Tulip filter struts through an introducer sheath: case report and safety concerns

The authors present a patient who had a Günther-Tulip inferior vena cava filter placed under fluoroscopic guidance. The filter struts were seen to penetrate through the introducer sheath at deployment. This was believed to be secondary to a kink in the sheath at the site of venous entry and was due to the patient's nuchal obesity as well as his inability to turn his head to the opposite side. The introducer sheath was then placed through a long reinforced metal sheath through which the filter was then placed without complication.

Transabdominal duplex ultrasonography for bedside inferior vena cava filter placement: examples, technique, and review

Pulmonary embolism remains an endemic challenge for public health care. The first line of treatment for venous thromboembolic disorder has been anticoagulation; however, in the absence of appropriate pharmacologic treatment, because of failure or contraindication, caval filter placement has been widely performed in the prevention of pulmonary embolism. Initially an open surgical procedure, technological advancements have allowed filter placement to be done percutaneously. Bedside filter placement in the intensive care unit with ultrasonographic imaging has been reported to be safe, effective, and reliable. In this report, we present an example, discuss our technique, and review the literature.

The effect of a temporary inferior vena cava filter in the treatment of deep vein thrombosis in critically-ill patients

We studied the clinical courses of patients with deep vein thrombus (DVT) who underwent insertion of temporary inferior vena cava filters (tIVCF) and evaluated the effectiveness of the tIVCF. From January 2003 to March 2008, tIVCF were placed in 12 patients with a diagnosis of DVT in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) of Gunma University Hospital. The mean age of the patients was 52 +/- 16 years (range, 18-82). Eight were medical patients who had not undergone any prior surgery, and 4 were postoperative patients, including 3 with a malignancy. The diagnosis of DVT was made using enhanced computed tomography. The Toray Neuhaus Protect catheter (6Fr, Toray Medical, Tokyo) was used as a tIVCF in all 12 patients. We evaluated the clinical course of the patients before and after placement of a tIVCF and studied their prognosis. DVT occurred on 15 +/- 9 days after surgery or admission to hospital. Pulmonary thromboembolism (PTE) was detected in 7 patients prior to the placement of a tIVCF, 3 of whom required cardiopulmonary resuscitation. The mean duration of tIVCF placement was 18 +/- 9 days; no episodes of PTE occurred after tIVCF placement. DVT completely or almost completely disappeared during the period of tIVCF placement; subsequently, tIVCFs were successfully removed in 10 patients (83%). A permanent IVCF was placed in only 1 patient, and the tIVCF was removed in the remaining patient because of suspected catheter infection. There were 2 complications related to tIVCF placement: infection at the insertion site and suspected catheter infection. tIVCF placement could prevent the occurrence of PTE without provoking life-threatening complications. The results suggest that tIVCF is useful in the prevention of PTE in patients with DVT.

The prevention of hospital-acquired venous thromboembolism in the United Kingdom

Hospital-acquired venous thromboembolism (VTE) remains the number one safety issue in hospitals and is estimated to cause more preventable deaths than the more publicized hospital-acquired infection. There has been a failure of implementation of thromboprophylaxis (TP), mainly because of lack of awareness among health professionals, despite the large number of evidence-based studies available. The situation in the UK is gradually changing because of tireless campaigning by politicians, a charity and key opinion leaders. In response, the Department of Health has issued a national risk assessment tool, and National Institute of Clinical Excellence (NICE) guidelines for the prevention of VTE in all hospitalised patients, which will be available in August 2009. Although NICE guidelines are only applicable in England, it is to be hoped Northern Ireland, Wales and Scotland will also follow. Despite this, the consensus of expert opinion is that TP needs mandating to prevent pockets of non-adherence. Low molecular weight heparins are currently the gold standard pharmacological agent for TP; but are likely to be superseded within the next 5 years by new classes of oral anticoagulants, such as dabigatran and rivaroxiban, which are already licensed for TP after orthopaedic surgery.

Bedside placement of removable vena cava filters guided by intravascular ultrasound in the critically injured

BACKGROUND

Bedside placement of removable inferior vena cava filters (RVCF) is increasingly used in critically injured patients. The need for fluoroscopic equipment and specialized intensive care unit beds presents major challenges. Intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) eliminates such problems. The objective of the present study was to analyze the safety and feasibility of IVUS-guided bedside RVCF placement in critically injured patients.

METHODS

Between October 2004 and July 2006 47 IVUS-guided RVCF were placed at the bedside. Medical and trauma registry records were reviewed. Primary outcome was RVCF-related complications.

RESULTS

The mean patient age was 41 +/- 19 years, and the mean Injury Severity Score was 30 +/- 12. The right common femoral vein was chosen as the site of access in 40 patients, and the left common femoral vein was the access site in 7 patients. The insertion was performed 3.7 +/- 2.5 days after admission. Four patients (8.5%) developed common femoral deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and three (6%) developed a peripheral pulmonary embolism (PE). Complications related to technique were recorded in two patients (4%) and included one misplacement and one access site bleeding with no further associated morbidity. Five patients died during the hospital stay from issues unrelated to RVCF. Forty-one patients were eligible for follow-up. Removal of RVCF was offered only to 8 patients and was performed successfully in 4 (10%) at a mean of 130 days (range: 44-183 days).

CONCLUSIONS

In this study IVUS-guided bedside placement of RVCF was feasible but was also associated with complications. Follow-up was poor, and the rate of removal disappointingly low, underscoring the need for further exploration of the role of RVCF.