These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: A method for following patients with retrievable inferior vena cava filters: results and lessons learned from the first 1,100 patients.
    Author: Lynch FC.
    Journal: J Vasc Interv Radiol; 2011 Nov; 22(11):1507-12. PubMed ID: 21903414.
    Abstract:
    PURPOSE: Patients who have undergone implantation of a retrievable inferior vena cava (IVC) filter require continued follow-up to have the device removed when clinically appropriate and in a timely fashion to avoid potential long-term filter-related complications. The efficacy of a method for patient follow-up was evaluated based on a retrospective review of a single-institutional retrievable IVC filter experience. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with retrievable IVC filters were tracked via a prospectively collected database designed specifically for patient follow-up. Follow-up consisted of periodic review of the electronic medical record. Patients were contacted by mail (at regular intervals one or more times) when removal of the filter was deemed appropriate. A retrospective review of the ultimate fate of the first 1,127 retrievable IVC filters placed at a single institution was performed. Retrieval rates were compared with those seen in the initial experience, during which no structured follow-up was performed. RESULTS: Of 1,127 filters placed, 658 (58.4%) were removed. Filter removal or declaration of the device as permanent was achieved in 860 patients (76.3%). Filter removal, declaration of the device as permanent, or establishment of the need for continued follow-up was achieved in 941 patients (83.5%). Only 186 patients (16.5%) were lost to follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: The follow-up method described in the present study resulted in a statistically significant difference (P < .001) in the likelihood of a patient returning for IVC filter removal compared with a lack of follow-up (59% vs 24%).
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]