Emergency interruption of the inferior vena cava: a debatable issue.
In spite of improvements in the diagnosis and treatment of thromboembolic disease, pulmonary embolism continues to be a major cause of morbidity and mortality. Anticoagulation remains the preferred therapy for deep venous thrombosis; however, this form of treatment is either ineffective or contraindicated for some patients. For these patients, partial interruption of the inferior vena cava via percutaneous filter placement has become the procedure of choice to protect against fatal pulmonary embolism. We described in this paper results obtained with the available permanent filters and complications of these filters described in the literature. We highlighted the interest of temporary filters in patients whose thromboembolic risk is temporary, finally we insist on recognised indications for vena cava filters when anticoagulation is contraindicated or ineffective.
Ricco
J B
JB
Vascular Surgery Service, University Hospital of Poitiers, Poitiers, France. jbr-scv@vasculaire.com
Bouin-Pineau
M H
MH
Camiade
C
C
Blecha
L M
LM
Reynaud
P
P
Faroy
F
F
Marchand
C
C
D000075202:Contraindications; D004867:Equipment Design; D005343:Fibrinolytic Agents / Q000627:therapeutic use; D006801:Humans; D011655:Pulmonary Embolism / Q000209:etiology* / Q000517:prevention & control*; D016306:Vena Cava Filters / Q000009:adverse effects; D020246:Venous Thrombosis / Q000150:complications*
D005343:Fibrinolytic Agents