IVC filters-Trends in placement and indications, a study of 2 populations

Epidemiology of the use of inferior vena cava filters in Brazil between 2008 and 2019

OBJECTIVES

The primary objective was to study the totality of inferior vena cava filter placements and their temporal and geographic distribution in the Brazilian Public Health System, which insures more than 160 million Brazilians. The secondary objective was to analyze in-hospital mortality after filter placement and deaths due to pulmonary embolism.

METHODS

Public and open data on in-hospital mortality due to pulmonary embolism and on rates of inferior vena cava filters placement, its associated diagnosis, and in-hospital mortality in Brazilian public hospitals between January 2008 and December 2019 were extracted from Ministry of Health databases.

RESULTS

A total of 9108 inferior vena cava filters were placed, 98.18% of which was therapeutic. We observed a significant increase in the use of these devices over the years, from 508 inferior vena cava filters placed in 2008 to 965 in 2019. In-hospital mortality rate in patients who received inferior vena cava filters was 6.21%, stable over time, and 96.64% of causes of these causes were attributed to venous thromboembolism. The in-hospital mortality rate due to pulmonary embolism, regardless of the placement of vena cava filters, has increased significantly.

CONCLUSION

We observed a low but increasing rate of inferior vena cava filter placements in Brazil between 2008 and 2019, most indications were therapeutic. Our findings were heterogeneous across Brazilian regions and contrasted to those observed in the USA, which is likely due to cultural and socioeconomic factors.

Appropriateness guidelines for inferior vena cava filter utilization: A contemporary review

Concern regarding the exponential increase in optional utilization of inferior vena cava filters (IVCFs) in the early 2000s with a persistent low retrieval rate nationwide has resulted in increased scrutiny regarding clinical application of IVCFs. IVCFs are used in a variety of clinical scenarios, ranging from thromboembolic protection in patients with deep venous thrombosis and contraindication to anticoagulation to prophylactic deployment in multitrauma and critically ill patients. Evidence supporting IVCFs as mechanical thromboembolic protection in certain clinical scenarios has been established through evidenced-based guidelines. As an adjunct to evidence-based guidelines, appropriateness criteria to address specific clinical scenarios and facilitate clinical decision making when considering placement of an IVCF have been developed. In this review, current evidence-based and appropriateness guidelines are summarized.

Association of vena cava filters and catheter-directed thrombolysis for deep vein thrombosis with hospital readmissions

BACKGROUND

Acute deep vein thrombosis (DVT) affects >350,000 patients each year in the United States. Contemporary rehospitalization rates and predictors of acute DVT have not been well-characterized. We aimed to evaluate the all-cause 30-day readmission rate and its association with catheter-directed thrombolysis and vena cava filters in patients with proximal and caval DVT.

METHODS

Patients with an index hospitalization for acute proximal lower extremity DVT were evaluated for unplanned readmission rates at 30 days using the Nationwide Readmission Database from 2016 to 2017. We used Cox proportional hazard model to determine the predictors of 30-day readmissions and their association with inferior vena cava (IVC) filter and CDT use.

RESULTS

We identified 58,306 adult patients with an index hospitalization for acute proximal DVT. The unplanned 30-day rehospitalization rate was 14.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 14.5-15.0%). There were 4995 patients (10.0%) who underwent CDT and 6085 (12.2%) who underwent IVC filter placement. In multivariable analysis, only CDT was associated with a lower hazard for rehospitalization (hazard ratio [HR], 0.77; 95% CI, 0.71-0.84; P < .001), whereas IVC filter placement (HR, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.19-1.34; P < .001), Charlson Comorbidity Index of >3 (HR, 1.47; 95% CI, 1.38-1.56; P < .001), malignancy (HR, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.34-1.57; P < .001), and length of stay >5 days (HR, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.33-1.46; P < .001), and acute kidney injury (HR, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.11-1.25; P < .001) were associated with higher readmission rates.

CONCLUSIONS

The 30-day unplanned rehospitalization rate continues to be high in patients with acute proximal DVT. CDT was associated with lower rehospitalization rates, whereas IVC filter placement was associated with increased rehospitalization rates.

Outpatient Follow-up of Pulmonary Embolism: Putting It all Together

Many patients discharged after an acute pulmonary embolism (PE) admission have inconsistent outpatient follow-up and insufficient workup for chronic complications of PE. A structured outpatient care program is lacking for the different phenotypes of chronic PE, such as chronic thromboembolic disease, chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension, and post-PE syndrome. A dedicated PE follow-up clinic extends the organized, systematic care provided to patients with PE via the PERT (Pulmonary Embolism Response Team) model in the outpatient setting. Such an initiative can standardize follow-up protocols after PE, limit unnecessary testing, and ensure adequate management of chronic complications.

Prophylactic Inferior Vena Cava Filters for Venous Thromboembolism in Adults With Trauma: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Trauma is an independent risk factor for venous thromboembolism (VTE). Due to contraindications or delay in starting pharmacological prophylaxis among trauma patients with a high risk of bleeding, the inferior vena cava (IVC) filter has been utilized as alternative prevention for pulmonary embolism (PE). Albeit, its clinical efficacy has remained uncertain. Therefore, we performed an updated systematic review and meta-analysis on the effectiveness and safety of prophylactic IVC filters in severely injured patients. Methods: Three databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane) were searched from August 1, 2012, to October 27, 2021. Independent reviewers performed data extraction and quality assessment. Relative risk (RR) at 95% confidence interval (CI) pooled in a randomized meta-analysis. A parallel clinical practice guideline committee assessed the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach. The outcomes of interest included VTE, PE, deep venous thrombosis, mortality, and IVC filter complications. Results: We included 10 controlled studies (47 140 patients), of which 3 studies (310 patients) were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 7 were observational studies (46 830 patients). IVC filters demonstrated no significant reduction in PE and fatal PE (RR, 0.27; 95% CI, 0.06-1.28 and RR, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.01-7.84, respectively) by pooling RCTs with low certainty. However, it demonstrated a significant reduction in the risk of PE and fatal PE (RR, 0.25; 95% CI, 0.12-0.55 and RR, 0.09; 95% CI, 0.011-0.81, respectively) by pooling observational studies with very low certainty. IVC filter did not improve mortality in both RCTs and observational studies (RR, 1.44; 95% CI, 0.86-2.43 and RR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.3-1.31, respectively). Conclusion: In trauma patients, moderate risk reduction of PE and fatal PE was demonstrated among observational data but not RCTs. The desirable effect is not robust to outweigh the undesirable effects associated with IVC filter complications. Current evidence suggests against routinely using prophylactic IVC filters.

Application of Deep Learning to IVC Filter Detection from CT Scans

IVC filters (IVCF) perform an important function in select patients that have venous blood clots. However, they are usually intended to be temporary, and significant delay in removal can have negative health consequences for the patient. Currently, all Interventional Radiology (IR) practices are tasked with tracking patients in whom IVCF are placed. Due to their small size and location deep within the abdomen it is common for patients to forget that they have an IVCF. Therefore, there is a significant delay for a new healthcare provider to become aware of the presence of a filter. Patients may have an abdominopelvic CT scan for many reasons and, fortunately, IVCF are clearly visible on these scans. In this research a deep learning model capable of segmenting IVCF from CT scan slices along the axial plane is developed. The model achieved a Dice score of 0.82 for training over 372 CT scan slices. The segmentation model is then integrated with a prediction algorithm capable of flagging an entire CT scan as having IVCF. The prediction algorithm utilizing the segmentation model achieved a 92.22% accuracy at detecting IVCF in the scans.

Factors Associated With Inferior Vena Cava Filter Placement and Retrieval for Patients With Cancer-Associated Thrombosis

BACKGROUND

Venous thromboembolism is a leading cause of death in patients with cancer. Inferior vena cava filters are utilized to mitigate the risk of pulmonary embolism for patients who have contraindication to, or failure of, anticoagulation.

METHODS

We reviewed an insurance claims database to identify adults receiving cancer-directed therapy and had a new diagnosis of venous thromboembolism. We then evaluated clinical and sociodemographic characteristics in patients with and without filter placement and retrieval.

RESULTS

There were 25,788 patients (mean [SD] age: 68.3 [12.7] years) who met the study inclusion criteria, with 2111 individuals (8.2%) undergoing filter placement. Filter placement was associated with the type of thrombosis, malignancy, recent surgery, comorbidities, and income. A total of 137 patients (6.5%) newly started anticoagulation within 3 days of filter placement, and 612 (29%) patients received anticoagulation within 30 days after filter placement. Despite this, only 159 (7.5%) patients had their filters retrieved during the study period. Patients with income of $75-99K (odds ratio 2.13, P = .012) or above $100K (odds ratio 1.8, P = .038) were more likely to have filter retrieval compared with those with income <$50K. Filter retrieval was also more likely in younger patients and those with fewer comorbidities or without central nervous system or lung malignancies.

CONCLUSIONS

Inferior vena cava filter placement and retrieval are associated with several sociodemographic factors. Filter retrieval rates are low despite re-initiation of anticoagulation in many patients. Efforts are needed to address disparities in filter use and improve retrieval rates.

IVC filters - Indications for placement and retrieval trends- experience from a tertiary referral centre in India type of submission- full paper

Objectives

There is wide variation in the practice of IVC filter placement and retrievals. We conducted a retrospective study to identify the trends in placement and retrievals of IVC filters in a tertiary referral centre in India.

Methods

The data of patients obtained from our hospital records, in whom IVC filter was placed between 2010 and 2018, were analysed for demographics, indications for placement of IVC filter, underlying comorbidities, characteristics of the filters as well as the retrieval rates.

Results

IVC filters were placed in 50 patients, and data was retrieved for 31 patients (mean - 51.24 years, 67.74% males). According to ACCP/AHA guidelines, 24 (77.42%) had an absolute indication for IVC filter. All 31 IVC filters were temporary, 23 (74.19%) of which were placed via femoral access. 29(93.55%) patients had infrarenal IVC filter placement. The average tilt at deployment was 3.71°, whereas it was 5.3° at retrieval. There were no periprocedural complications or filter migrations during placement or retrieval. Retrieval was attempted in 11 (35.48%) patients and was successful in 10. The mean indwelling time in this group was 158.55 days (range 55–366 days).

Conclusion

Our study reveals low IVC filter implantation rates which are predominantly for absolute rather than relative indications. Though in sync with the worldwide trend, the poor retrieval rates reflect the urgent need for better patient and physician awareness. Periodic follow up is imperative to improve the IVC filter retrieval rate and to prevent complication rates.

Dilemmas in anticoagulation and use of inferior vena cava filters in venous thromboembolism; a survey of Respiratory Physicians, Haematologists and Medical Oncologists and a review of the literature

Twenty percent of patients with Cancer Associated Thrombosis receive an inferior vena cava filter annually. Insertion is guided by practice guidelines, which do not specify or discuss the use of inferior vena cava filters in malignancy. Adherence to these guidelines is known to be variable. We aimed to see if there was consistent management of venous thromboembolism among Medical Oncologists/Haematologists and Respiratory Physicians, with respect to inferior vena cava filter use in the setting of suspected and confirmed malignancy. Medical Oncologists, Haematologists and Respiratory Physicians were surveyed with four theoretical cases. Case 1 concerns a patient who develops a pulmonary embolism following spinal surgery. Cases 2 and 4 explore the use of inferior vena cava filters in the setting of malignancy. Case 3 covers the role of inferior vena cava filters in recurrent thrombosis despite systemic anticoagulation. There were 56 responses, 32 (57%) Respiratory Physicians and 24 (43%) Haematologists/Oncologists. Respiratory Physicians were significantly more likely to insert an inferior vena cava filter in case 1 (p = 0.04) whilst Haematologists/Medical Oncologists were more likely to insert an inferior vena cava filter in case 3 (p = 0.03). No significant differences were found in cases 2 and 4. There were significant disparities in terms of type and timing of anticoagulation. Consistency of recommendations with guidelines was variable likely in part because guidelines are themselves inconsistent. The heterogeneity in responses highlights the variations in venous thromboembolism management, especially in Cancer Associated Thrombosis. International Societies should consider addressing inferior vena cava filter use specifically in the setting of Cancer Associated Thrombosis. Collaboration between interested specialities would assist in developing consistent, evidence-based guidelines for the use of inferior vena cava filters in the management of venous thromboembolism.

Type 2 Diabetes Is a Risk Factor for Suffering and for in-Hospital Mortality with Pulmonary Embolism. A Population-Based Study in Spain (2016-2018)

(1) Background: The relationship between type 2 diabetes (T2DM) and pulmonary embolism (PE) has not been well stablished so far. We aim to analyze incidence, clinical conditions and in-hospital mortality (IHM) according to the presence of T2DM among patients hospitalized for suffering from PE. The factors associated with IHM were identified. (2) Methods: Patients aged ≥40 years hospitalized for PE from 2016 to 2018 included in the Spanish National Health System Hospital Discharge Database were analyzed. Dependent variables included incidence, IHM and length of hospital stay. Independent variables were age, sex, diagnosed comorbidities, thrombolytic therapy and inferior vena cava filter placement. Poisson and logistic regression models were constructed for multivariable analysis. (3) Results: Of the 47,190 hospitalizations for PE recorded, 16.52% had T2DM. Adjusted incidence of PE was higher among T2DM women (IRR 1.83; 95% CI: 1.58-1.96) and men (IRR 1.22; 95% CI: 1.18-1.27) than among non-diabetic subjects. Crude IHM in T2DM patients with PE was similar in both sexes but higher than in non-diabetic patients. Among T2DM patients with PE, risk factors for IHM included older age, comorbidity, atrial fibrillation and massive PE. Obesity was associated with lower IHM. Suffering T2DM was a risk of IHM (OR 1.15; 95% CI 1.05-1.26) after PE. (4) Conclusions: The incidence of PE is higher in T2DM men and women than in non-diabetic patients. T2DM was a risk factor for IHM after PE.

A Multicenter Trial of Vena Cava Filters in Severely Injured Patients

BACKGROUND

Whether early placement of an inferior vena cava filter reduces the risk of pulmonary embolism or death in severely injured patients who have a contraindication to prophylactic anticoagulation is not known.

METHODS

In this multicenter, randomized, controlled trial, we assigned 240 severely injured patients (Injury Severity Score >15 [scores range from 0 to 75, with higher scores indicating more severe injury]) who had a contraindication to anticoagulant agents to have a vena cava filter placed within the first 72 hours after admission for the injury or to have no filter placed. The primary end point was a composite of symptomatic pulmonary embolism or death from any cause at 90 days after enrollment; a secondary end point was symptomatic pulmonary embolism between day 8 and day 90 in the subgroup of patients who survived at least 7 days and did not receive prophylactic anticoagulation within 7 days after injury. All patients underwent ultrasonography of the legs at 2 weeks; patients also underwent mandatory computed tomographic pulmonary angiography when prespecified criteria were met.

RESULTS

The median age of the patients was 39 years, and the median Injury Severity Score was 27. Early placement of a vena cava filter did not result in a significantly lower incidence of symptomatic pulmonary embolism or death than no placement of a filter (13.9% in the vena cava filter group and 14.4% in the control group; hazard ratio, 0.99; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.51 to 1.94; P = 0.98). Among the 46 patients in the vena cava filter group and the 34 patients in the control group who did not receive prophylactic anticoagulation within 7 days after injury, pulmonary embolism developed in none of those in the vena cava filter group and in 5 (14.7%) in the control group, including 1 patient who died (relative risk of pulmonary embolism, 0; 95% CI, 0.00 to 0.55). An entrapped thrombus was found in the filter in 6 patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Early prophylactic placement of a vena cava filter after major trauma did not result in a lower incidence of symptomatic pulmonary embolism or death at 90 days than no placement of a filter. (Funded by the Medical Research Foundation of Royal Perth Hospital and others; Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry number, ACTRN12614000963628.).

Mortality in sepsis: Comparison of outcomes between patients with demand ischemia, acute myocardial infarction, and neither demand ischemia nor acute myocardial infarction

INTRODUCTION

Elevation in cardiac troponins is common with sepsis despite unclear impact.

HYPOTHESIS

We investigated whether demand ischemia(DI) resulted in variable outcomes compared to acute myocardial infarction(AMI) and those with neither DI nor AMI in sepsis.

METHODS

We analyzed data from the 2011-2014 National Inpatient Sample among patients admitted for sepsis. We compared outcomes among patients with DI i) versus AMI and ii) versus neither DI nor AMI, respectively using propensity matching. Primary study end-point was in-hospital mortality.

RESULTS

We studied 666,154 patients, with mean age 63.7 years and 50.8% female participants. Overall, 94.7% of the included patients had neither DI nor AMI, 4.4% had AMI and 0.83% had DI. Between 2011 and 2014, we observed an increasing trend for DI but decreasing trend for AMI in sepsis. Patients with DI experienced higher rates of atrial and ventricular arrhythmias, had longer length of stay and higher cost of stay compared to patients with neither demand ischemia nor AMI. Despite higher hospital mortality at baseline with DI, post-propensity matching revealed no difference in hospital mortality between patients with DI and those with neither (26.9% vs. 27.0%, adjusted odds ratio 0.99, 95% confidence intervals 0.92-1.07;p=0.87). Patients with DI experienced lower hospital mortality compared to those with AMI pre (28.5% vs. 48.3%;p<0.001) and post-propensity matching (41.1% vs. 29.1%, aOR 0.58, 95% CI 0.54-0.63;p<0.001).

CONCLUSION

Among patients with sepsis, those with DI had similar adjusted in-hospital mortality compared to those with neither DI nor AMI. Patients with AMI had the highest in-hospital mortality among all groups.

A Rational Adoption of the High Sensitive Assay for Cardiac Troponin I in Diagnostic Routine

We describe the adoption of high sensitive troponin I (hsTnI) in clinical practice in two hospital settings in Italy. Samples from 426 consecutive patients (mean age 68.8 ± 17.0) admitted to the Emergency Department with a suspected acute coronary syndrome (ACS) have been tested at admittance and after 3 and 6 hours by contemporary TnI and hsTnI. Results have been compared to the final clinical diagnosis. Troponin was detectable in 68.6% by TnI and 89.9% by hsTnI. Since hsTnI has a lower threshold for females, 38/41 patients with positive values only by hsTnI were women. The correlation between the assays was very high (r = 0.92). A diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) was made in 45 cases (10.5%). The negative and positive predictive values for a 50% troponin variation at 3 hours were 95.8% and 66.7% for hsTnI and 95.0% and 52.6% for TnI and at 6 hours 90.3% and 100% for hsTnI and 88.9% and 78.9% for TnI, respectively. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis demonstrated a greater efficiency by hsTnI at 3 hours versus 6 hours (AUC = 0.91 versus 0.72). The main benefits of hsTnI are the adoption of gender-specific 99th percentile and the shortening of time to decision.