Few adverse events seen, even in prophylactic use<\/p>\n<\/h3>\n
By Lori Solomon HealthDay Reporter<\/b><\/p>\n
<\/b><\/p>\n
THURSDAY, March 16, 2023 (HealthDay News) — Inferior vena cava filters (VCFs) are a safe and effective way to treat venous thromboembolism (VTE), according to a study published online Feb. 23 in the Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology<\/em>.<\/p>\n Matthew S. Johnson, M.D., from Indiana University School of Medicine in Indianapolis, and colleagues assessed the safety and effectiveness of VCFs. The analysis included 1,421 participants (mean 62.7 years old; 53.3 percent male) who were treated at 54 U.S. sites between Oct. 10, 2015, and March 31, 2019.<\/p>\n The researchers found that primary safety (freedom from perioperative serious adverse events [AEs] and from clinically significant perforation, VCF embolization, caval thrombotic occlusion, and\/or new deep vein thrombosis [DVT] within 12 months) and effectiveness (composite composed of procedural and technical success and freedom from new symptomatic pulmonary embolism [PE] confirmed by imaging at 12 months in situ or one month postretrieval) were met. Procedural AEs were uncommon and usually minor, although one patient died during VCF removal. Strut perforation >5 mm was seen in 31 of 201 patients’ computed tomography scans (15.4 percent), but only three were deemed clinically significant. VCF-related AEs were rare (0.5 percent). VTE events (none fatal) occurred in 6.5 percent of patients postfilter, including DVT (5.2 percent), PE (1.6 percent), and\/or caval thrombotic occlusions (1.1 percent). In patients receiving prophylactic placement, no PE occurred.<\/p>\n “Now that the study is complete, we now have a roadmap for better filter utilization,” a coauthor said in a statement. We need to solidify a clearer set of practice guidelines for venous thromboembolic disease, based on its symptoms, location, and complications.”<\/p>\n Several authors disclosed financial ties to the medical device industry.<\/p>\n