Late erosion of a prophylactic Celect IVC filter into the aorta, right renal artery, and duodenal wall

Open retrieval management of inferior vena cava filter erosion resulting in symptomatic hydroureteronephrosis

Inferior vena cava filters are effective for the management of thromboembolic disease but can erode into adjacent organ systems in rare instances. Endovascular retrieval of eroded filters has been the preferred management for this complication. We present a case for which endovascular retrieval was not appropriate because of filter orientation and erosion into the ureter and describe successful management using open retrieval of a permanent filter with erosion into the renal collecting system requiring reconstruction. Although minimally invasive retrieval is preferred over open repair, this approach should be considered when filter erosion is not amenable to endovascular retrieval.

Management of a contained ruptured infrarenal abdominal aortic pseudoaneurysm caused by inferior vena cava struts injury: A case report and literature review

Aortic pseudoaneurysms are rare entities caused by infection, trauma, atherosclerotic plaque rupture, or aortic instrumentation. Their natural course remains unknown; however, repair is invariably recommended. We present a case of a 71-year-old man with a history of recurrent deep venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolisms who underwent an inferior vena cava filter placement 8 years prior and was found to have a 3.6-cm contained ruptured infrarenal aortic pseudoaneurysm on imaging performed for abdominal pain. His pseudoaneurysm was excluded using a Gore Excluder Endoprosthesis. We further reviewed literature on the subject to highlight the various surgical approaches to this lethal condition.

Functional Superior Mesenteric Artery Syndrome Induced by an Optional IVC Filter

This patient suffered multiple injuries in a motor vehicle crash. She had an optional IVC filter placed in the usual fashion and location which resulted in a functional obstruction of the third part of the duodenum much as one would expect with a Superior Mesenteric Artery (SMA) syndrome. The symptoms persisted over the sixteen-day filter dwell time and resolved completely with the retrieval of the filter.

A technique for taping inferior vena cava caudal to the duodenum: duodenal penetration by IVC filter strut after retroperitoneal lymph node dissection-usefulness of the mesenteric approach

Background

Although an inferior vena cava (IVC) filter is used for preventing pulmonary thromboembolism (PTE) in patients with deep vein thrombosis, IVC filter penetration in the duodenum is a rare complication.

Case presentation

A 35-year-old man had previously undergone retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (RPLND) for testicular cancer and IVC filter placement for prevention of PTE. Esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) for his epigastric pain revealed penetration of the IVC filter in the duodenum. The IVC filter was retrieved through cavotomy, and the duodenal penetration was repaired using EGD clipping. Although it was difficult to mobilize the duodenum due to adhesion resulting from RPLND, the use of a mesenteric approach enabled encircling of the IVC caudal to the duodenum. The mesenteric approach is useful and safe for taping the IVC caudal to the duodenum in cases where it is difficult to mobilize the duodenum.

Conclusion

IVC taping using the mesenteric approach allowed safe retrieval of the IVC filter after RPLND without postoperative complications.

Endovascular Removal of Inferior Vena Cava Filters with Arterial Penetration

PURPOSE

To evaluate the safety and outcomes of endovascular percutaneous removal of inferior vena cava filters (IVCFs) with elements penetrating an artery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From an IVCF retrieval database, computerized tomographic scans of patients who underwent IVCF retrieval from 2011 to 2017 were reviewed for IVCF elements penetrating through the caval wall and into an adjacent arterial wall (AW) or penetrating into an adjacent arterial lumen (AL). Forty-two patients were identified, including 20 with elements penetrating into an AW and 22 with elements penetrating into an AL; 30 of these IVCFs were tip embedded.

RESULTS

All of the filters in both groups were removed. Of the arterial-interacting filters, 9 were removed with the use of standard techniques and 33 with the use of endobronchial forceps. Arterial access was obtained before removal in 3 patients (7%) with post-removal arteriography revealing no abnormalities, such as extravasation, pseudoaneurysm, or new fractured components. There was no significant difference between groups in tip embedding, retrieval technique, or fluoroscopy time.

CONCLUSIONS

Endovascular removal of IVCFs with elements that have penetrated into adjacent arterial walls or lumens can be performed safely in the majority of patients.

Symptomatic duodenal perforation by inferior vena cava filter

Objectives

Duodenal perforation by an inferior vena cava filter is rare and life threatening. Our objective is to find out number of occurrences and compare diagnosis and treatments.

Method

The reference list of Malgor’s review in 2012 was considered as well as all new articles with eligible features. Search was conducted on specific databases: MEDLINE, Web of Sciences, and Literatura Latino-Americana e do Caribe em Ciências da Saúde.

Results

Most of the patients presented with upper abdominal pain and the use of radiologic studies was crucial for diagnosis. The most common treatment was laparotomy with filter or strut removal plus duodenum repair. However, clinical conditions of patients must be considered and the endovascular technique with endograft deployment into inferior vena cava may be an alternative.

Conclusion

Duodenal perforation by an inferior vena cava filter is uncommon and in high-risk surgical patients endovascular repair must be considered.

Inferior vena cava filter penetration following Whipple surgical procedure causing ureteral injury

We report a case of an indwelling inferior vena cava filter that penetrated the IVC wall after Whipple's pancreatico-duodenectomy procedure performed in a patient with ampullary carcinoma, resulting in right ureteral injury and obstruction with subsequent hydroureter and hydronephrosis. This was incidentally discovered on a computed tomography scan performed as routine follow up to evaluate the results of the surgery. We retrieved the inferior vena cava filter and placed a nephrostomy catheter to relieve the ureteral obstruction. Our case highlights the importance of careful inferior vena cava manipulation during abdominal surgery in the presence of an inferior vena cava filter, and the option of temporary removal of the filter to be placed again after surgery in order to avoid this complication, unless protection is required against clot migration during the surgical procedure.

Methods and Guidelines for Venous Thromboembolism Prevention in Polytrauma Patients with Pelvic and Acetabular Fractures

Sequential compression devices and chemical prophylaxis are the standard venous thromboembolism (VTE) prevention for trauma patients with acetabular and pelvic fractures. Current chemical pharmacological contemplates the use of heparins or fondaparinux. Other anticoagulants include coumarins and aspirin, however these oral agents can be challenging to administer and may need monitoring. When contraindications to anticoagulation in high-risk patients are present, prophylactic inferior vena cava filters can be an option to prevent pulmonary emboli. Unfortunately strong evidence about the most effective method, and the timing of their commencement, in patients with pelvic and acetabular fractures remains controversial.

Penetration of an inferior vena cava filter into the aorta

Transvenous placement of inferior vena cava (IVC) filters is commonly performed in selected patients with deep venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolism. However, filter placement is sometimes associated with serious complications. A common complication is asymptomatic perforation of the IVC and penetration of adjacent organs by the filter. Here, we report a case of an 83-year-old man whose prophylactic IVC filter penetrated the aorta. The patient was closely followed without surgical intervention for more than a year, and no additional complications were observed.

Strut penetration: local complications, breakthrough pulmonary embolism, and retrieval failure in patients with Celect vena cava filters

PURPOSE

To investigate strut penetration in patients with Celect filters, specifically local complications and association with breakthrough pulmonary embolism (PE) or retrieval failure.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective single-center study was conducted to evaluate patients who received Celect filters between January 2007 and May 2013. A total of 595 filters were placed during the study period. Primary indications included thromboembolic disease (93%) and primary surgical prophylaxis (7%). Complications and retrieval data were assessed by computed tomography (CT) and electronic medical records.

RESULTS

A total of 193 patients underwent follow-up abdominal CT at a mean follow-up interval of 176.2 days (range, 0-1,739 d). The rate of strut penetration more than 3 mm outside the caval wall was 28.5% (n = 55). One patient had CT evidence of clinically major strut penetration (1.8%) with strut compression of the right ureter causing hydronephrosis. Indwelling filter time longer than 100 days was associated with strut penetration (P < .001). Age, sex, and history of thromboembolic disease were not associated with strut penetration (P = .51, P = .81, and P = .89). Sixty-three patients presented for follow-up CT pulmonary angiography at a mean of 128.1 days (range, 1-895 d). The rate of breakthrough PE was 12.7%. The overall retrieval success rate was 96.7% (n = 150). Strut penetration was not associated with breakthrough PE or retrieval failure (P = .49 and P = .22).

CONCLUSIONS

Although strut penetration is a common complication with Celect filters, there is no association with breakthrough PE or retrieval failure. CT evidence of local complications associated with strut penetration is rare.

Retroperitoneal aortic hemorrhage caused by penetration of an endovascular stent-graft anchoring barb

PURPOSE

To report a rare case of acute intraoperative retroperitoneal hemorrhage secondary to aortic penetration by the suprarenal anchoring barb on a stent-graft.

CASE REPORT

A 75-year-old patient on dual antiplatelet therapy for coronary stents and low-molecular-weight heparin for atrial thrombus underwent elective endovascular repair of a 6.7-cm infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm. A device with suprarenal fixation and metal anchoring barbs was implanted, and a molding balloon was used that at no time covered the proximal bare metal stents or barbs. In recovery, the patient became tachycardic and hypotensive. After resuscitation, imaging identified an anterior barb penetrating the aortic wall, causing the acute retroperitoneal hemorrhage. A decision to treat conservatively rather than resort to open surgery was difficult but ultimately influenced by the patients' high risk for open surgery. The patient was treated by aggressive reversal of heparin and platelet transfusion, and the bleed settled spontaneously.

CONCLUSION

Major surgery and subsequent morbidity may be avoided by medical management of what would appear to be a surgical problem.

Uterine trauma with fetal loss associated with chronic perforation of the inferior vena cava by an infrarenal vena cava filter

Gestational complications in pregnant women have been considered a theoretical sequelae of vena cava filters (VCFs) positioned in the infrarenal segment of the inferior vena cava. We describe a 32-year-old woman who became pregnant with the known existence of an asymptomatic but chronically perforated, permanent infrarenal VCF. At 24 weeks gestation, uterine trauma leading to massive intraperitoneal hemorrhage and fetal loss occurred. Our case documents that gestational risk, heretofore theoretical, is real and calls for heightened awareness of the need for appropriate VCF management in women of childbearing age and consideration for preconception evaluation of the filter-bearing inferior vena cava in women considering pregnancy in whom VCFs have been previously implanted.

Complications of Celect, Günther tulip, and Greenfield inferior vena cava filters on CT follow-up: a single-institution experience

PURPOSE

To evaluate and compare the rates of complications on follow-up computed tomography (CT) studies of patients with Celect, Günther Tulip, and Greenfield inferior vena cava (IVC) filters.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Retrospective review of CT studies obtained 0-1,987 days after infrarenal placement of an IVC filter identified 255 Celect, 160 Tulip, and 50 Greenfield filters. Follow-up CT studies were independently evaluated by two observers for IVC perforation, contact with adjacent organs, and filter fracture. Multivariate analysis was performed to identify factors associated with higher rates of IVC perforation, including age, IVC diameter, sex, and history of malignancy.

RESULTS

IVC perforation was observed in 126 of 255 Celect filters (49%) with a mean follow-up of 277 days, 69 of 160 Tulip filters (43%) with a mean follow-up of 437 days, and one of 50 Greenfield filters (2%) with a mean follow-up of 286 days. A significantly higher IVC perforation rate was observed in women (45.5%) compared with men (30.8%; P = .002) and in patients with a history of malignancy (43.7%) compared with patients with no history of malignancy (29.9%; P < .001). Filter fracture was rare, observed in two of 255 Celect filters (0.8%), one of 160 Tulip filters (0.6%), and none of 50 Greenfield filters.

CONCLUSIONS

No significant difference was observed in IVC perforation rate between Celect and Tulip filters. Greenfield filters had a significantly lower rate of IVC perforation than Celect and Tulip filters. Higher IVC perforation rates were observed in women and patients with a history of malignancy.

Factors impacting follow-up care after placement of temporary inferior vena cava filters

OBJECTIVE

Rates of inferior vena cava (IVC) filter retrieval have remained suboptimal, in part because of poor follow-up. The goal of our study was to determine demographic and clinical factors predictive of IVC filter follow-up care in a university hospital setting.

METHODS

We reviewed 250 consecutive patients who received an IVC filter placement with the intention of subsequent retrieval between March 2009 and October 2010. Patient demographics, clinical factors, and physician specialty were evaluated. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to identify variables predicting follow-up care.

RESULTS

In our cohort, 60.7% of patients received follow-up care; of those, 93% had IVC filter retrieval. Major indications for IVC filter placement were prophylaxis for high risk surgery (53%) and venous thromboembolic event with contraindication and/or failure of anticoagulation (39%). Follow-up care was less likely for patients discharged to acute rehabilitation or skilled nursing facilities (P < .0001), those with central nervous system pathology (eg, cerebral hemorrhage or spinal fracture; P < .0001), and for those who did not receive an IVC filter placement by a vascular surgeon (P < .0001). In a multivariate analysis, discharge home (odds ratio [OR], 4.0; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.99-8.2; P < .0001), central nervous system pathology (OR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.22-0.95; P = .04), and IVC filter placement by the vascular surgery service (OR, 4.7; 95% CI, 2.3-9.6; P < .0001) remained independent predictors of follow-up care. Trauma status and distance of residence did not significantly impact likelihood of patient follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Service-dependent practice paradigms play a critical role in patient follow-up and IVC filter retrieval rates. Nevertheless, specific patient populations are more prone to having poorer rates of follow-up. Such trends should be factored into institutional quality control goals and patient-centered care.

Erosion of inferior vena caval filter noted during robotic assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy

Inferior Vena Cava (IVC) filters are mechanical devices implanted to provide prophylaxis against pulmonary emboli in patients for whom standard anticoagulation is either inadequate or contraindicated. A 67-year-old female with a 10-year-old indwelling IVC filter underwent robotic assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for a right upper pole renal mass. Renal hilum dissection was complicated by adhesions secondary to eroded IVC filter struts. IVC filter erosion is a well-described phoenomena in both the radiologic and surgical literature. As many as 25% of filters are noted to be radiographically eroded; however, the incidence of clinically significant erosion is much less. Given the placement of endovascularly delivered IVC filters in close proximity to many urologic operative fields, it is important for urologists to be aware of the potential of eroded devices when pursuing para-caval dissections.

Endovascular Retrieval of an Inferior Vena Cava Filter With Simultaneous Caval, Aortic, and Duodenal Perforations

A 47-year-old female presented to the emergency department complaining of diffuse abdominal pain and melena. She previously had a Bard G2X inferior vena cava filter placed before undergoing a laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass 3 years before her current presentation. She had a history of an anastomotic ulcer that was treated medically. A repeat endoscopic evaluation revealed no evidence of a recent bleed and the ulcer was healed. Computed tomography revealed evidence of multiple filter struts penetrating through the caval wall into the duodenum and aorta. The filter was successfully removed using an En Snare without complications. Reviewing the current literature, open surgical repair has been the treatment of choice for similar patient presentations. We present a successful case of the endovascular retrieval of an inferior vena cava filter with simultaneous caval, aortic, and duodenal penetrations.

Duodenal perforation caused by an inferior vena cava filter

The inferior vena cava (IVC) filter is known as an effective and safe method for preventing fatal pulmonary thromboembolism in patients with deep vein thrombosis. Usually, the remaining IVC filters are asymptomatic and do not cause clinical problems. We report a case of duodenal perforation caused by a remaining IVC filter.

Inferior vena cava filters: a concise review

Venous thromboembolic disease is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Anticoagulation has been the mainstay of treatment and prevention. Unfortunately, anticoagulation frequently fails or is contraindicated. Use of inferior vena cava filters can be an effective alternative in these scenarios. Though inferior vena cava filters have been used for > 4 decades, the evidence behind their use is limited. Use of IVC filters is associated with both minor and major complications. More randomized prospective trials are needed to evaluate these devices. In this article, we review issues concerning the use of inferior vena cava filters.