The use of retrievable inferior vena cava filters in the trauma population

Prophylactic Inferior Vena Cava Filters : Outcomes in Severely Injured Trauma Patients

BACKGROUND

Patients with major trauma and contraindications to anticoagulation are often considered candidates for a prophylactic inferior vena cava filter (IVCF). Prophylactic IVCFs are controversial in trauma and backed by varying levels of evidence. This study aims to analyze outcomes in severely injured patients who receive IVCFs.

METHODS

A retrospective review of trauma patients aged ≥ 16 years with ISS ≥ 15 admitted to our level 1 trauma center from years 2013 through 2018. Patients were divided into 2 groups: prophylactic IVCF versus VTE chemoprophylaxis. The analysis evaluated demographics, stratified by ISS (15-24, 25-34, ≥35), and subgrouped those with AIS-Head ≥3. Adjusted outcome measures included DVT, PE, mortality, and ICU length-of-stay (ICU-LOS).

RESULTS

The study sample included 413 patients with prophylactic IVCFs and 2487 on VTE chemoprophylaxis. IVCF placement was associated with higher severity injuries: ISS 28 versus 25 and lower GCS 10.0 versus 11.8, TBI prevalence 83% versus 68% (P < .001). Patients with IVCFs had increased ICU-LOS (23.2 days vs 12.2 days), DVT (14.8% vs 4.3%), and PE (5.8% vs 1.6%) for patients with ISS <35 (P < .001). ISS ≥35 was not associated with intergroup DVT or PE rate differences (P = .81 and .43). No intergroup mortality differences were observed, including after ISS stratification. Among patients with AIS-Head ≥3, prophylactic IVCF was associated with lower in-hospital mortality (8.4% vs 15.7%, P = .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Prophylactic IVCF placement was associated with higher rates of DVT and nonfatal PE, and prolonged ICU-LOS. Prophylactic IVCF placement was not associated with increased in-hospital mortality for severely injured trauma patients. Among patients with concomitant critical head injuries (AIS-Head ≥3), prophylactic IVCF placement was associated with lower in-hospital mortality than VTE chemoprophylaxis.

Timing of Prophylactic Inferior Vena Cava Filter Placement and Trauma Outcomes : Does Early Placement Matter?

BACKGROUND

Prophylactic inferior vena cava filters (IVCFs) are often placed in trauma patients who cannot receive prophylactic anticoagulation. IVCFs are utilized in an effort to reduce the risk of acute pulmonary embolism (PE) and mortality. This study aims to investigate whether time-to-filter placement is associated with differences in trauma outcomes.

METHODS

We conducted a single-center retrospective review of adult trauma patients who underwent prophylactic IVCF placement. Patients were divided into 2 groups based on time-to-filter: 0-48 hours and >48 hours. Outcome measures included post-filter deep vein thrombosis (DVT), post-filter PE, in-hospital mortality, and ICU length of stay (ICU-LOS). Significance was defined as P < .05.

RESULTS

During the 6-year study period, 513 patients underwent prophylactic IVCF placement. Both groups were similar with respect to injury severity score (ISS) (P = .540), percent of patients on home anticoagulation (38% and 39%, P = .845), abbreviated injury scale (AIS) by anatomic region (P = .899), and traumatic brain injury (TBI) prevalence (P = .182). Time-to-filter was not associated with significant differences in DVT, PE, or in-hospital mortality (P > .05 for all). Filter placement in the first 48 hours was associated with shorter ICU-LOS and hospital-LOS.

CONCLUSIONS

Currently, there are no investigations in the trauma literature looking at the impact of time-to-filter on complications related to venous thromboembolism and potential survival benefit. Results of this investigation showed that IVCF placement within the first 48 hours was significantly associated with shorter ICU- and hospital- LOS.