Optional vena cava filters for patients with high thromboembolic risk: questions to be answered.
The use of vena cava filters has increased rapidly over the past few years to more than 140,000 filters inserted worldwide in 2003. Continued improvements in filter design have increased the safety of intravascular caval filtration. Although there are many factors attributed to this increase, the most significant contributing factor has been the development of optional vena cava filters. That is, filters that can be left as a permanent device or can be removed endovascularly at a later date. Three filters are approved for removal in the United States, the Günther Tulip, the OptEase, and the Recovery. Recent reports have demonstrated the safety and feasibility of these devices in appropriate patients, but a number of questions have arisen regarding their use.
Sing
Ronald F
RF
Carolinas Laparoscopic and Advanced Surgery Program, Carolinas Medical Center, Charlotte, NC 28203, USA. ron.sing@carolinashealthcare.org
Rogers
Frederick B
FB
Novitsky
Yuri W
YW
Heniford
B Todd
BT
D020878:Device Removal; D004867:Equipment Design; D004869:Equipment Safety; D005260:Female; D005500:Follow-Up Studies; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D011322:Primary Prevention / Q000379:methods; D011655:Pulmonary Embolism / Q000175:diagnosis / Q000517:prevention & control*; D018570:Risk Assessment; D055502:Secondary Prevention; D016306:Vena Cava Filters / Q000009:adverse effects / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D020246:Venous Thrombosis / Q000175:diagnosis / Q000517:prevention & control*