Keywords:
Interventional vascular, Veins / Vena cava, Vascular, Catheter venography, Audit and standards, Filter insertions, Removal, Embolism / Thrombosis, Outcomes
Authors:
J.-Y. Kowa, B. Hawthorn, R. Das, M. Gonsalves, S. M. Ameli, L. Ratnam; London/UK
DOI:
10.1594/ecr2018/C-1813
Conclusion
From the total number of IVC filter insertions,
63.8% were retrieved.
29.8% of filters were not retrieved for a specified clinical reason.
The remaining 6.4% of filters in-situ were lost to follow-up.
Despite the majority of patients having no contra-indications to retrieval at the time of filter insertion,
only approximately 53% of patients (excluding deaths and those not clinically indicated) had dates booked for retrieval at the time of filter insertion.
An original study at our institution by Lee et al [3] revealed 21.4% of filters inserted within a 1-year period were lost to follow-up,
prior to measures of issuing a standard report and arranging provisional retrieval dates at the time of insertion. To further improve retrieval rates,
a more proactive radiology-led approach is to be trialled in the near future to improve this aspect of service.
This will involve radiology administrative staff reviewing the filter database on a regular basis,
and contacting clinicians to ensure a working plan is made for the IVC filter.