Vena caval interruption.
While anticoagulation remains the treatment of choice for acute pulmonary thromboembolism, vena caval interruption represents an alternative for persons with either a contraindication to or a complication of anticoagulation. The authors retrospectively reviewed their experience with vena caval interruption over a recent 5-year period. One hundred seven Greenfield filters (Medi-Tech; Watertown, MA) and 13 external vena caval clips were used in 120 patients. Indications for caval interruption were: 1) contraindication to anticoagulation (38%), 2) recurrent pulmonary embolism despite adequate anticoagulation (23%), 3) prophylaxis (22%), and 4) complications associated with anticoagulation (17%). Vena caval interruption was successfully accomplished in 98 per cent of attempts. The overall complication rate was 7 per cent, with no procedure-related major morbidity or mortality. Sixty-five patients were followed for a mean of 36 months. In that interval, there were the following: 1) one instance of venous stasis ulceration, 2) two cases of late caval thrombosis, and 3) one person with documented recurrent pulmonary emboli. Significant edema requiring support stockings was reported in 16 per cent of persons with Greenfield filters and 37 per cent of those with caval clips. Vena caval interruption by use of the Greenfield filter is a safe and effective means of protecting against pulmonary embolism with few immediate or long-term complications.
Braverman
S J
SJ
Department of Surgery, Emory University Hospital, Atlanta, Georgia 30322.
Battey
P M
PM
Smith
R B
RB
D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D000369:Aged, 80 and over; D000925:Anticoagulants; D000075202:Contraindications; D005260:Female; D005500:Follow-Up Studies; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D011183:Postoperative Complications; D011655:Pulmonary Embolism / Q000517:prevention & control*; D012008:Recurrence; D012189:Retrospective Studies; D016306:Vena Cava Filters; D014684:Venae Cavae
D000925:Anticoagulants