title: [Who is responsible for the removal of inferior vena cava filters?].
abstract: The fact that many inferior vena cava filters (IVCF) in trauma patients are not being removed has been described numerous times in the literature, but nobody really gives a reason why. This case presents a young patient who prophylactically received an optional IVCF after sustaining severe multitrauma. He had a failed retrieval 8 weeks post insertion and consequently was lost to follow-up before a second removal attempt was performed. Institutions inserting IVCF should establish guidelines for following up patients receiving prophylactic IVCF.
authors: Department of Orthopedic and Trauma Surgery, Royal Perth Hospital, North block, Level 5, Wellington Str., 6000, Perth, Western Australia. dbaschera@bluewin.ch
authors: D
authors: D
authors: Baschera
authors: J
authors: J
authors: Sebunya
authors: R
authors: R
authors: Zellweger
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D020878:Device Removal / Q000592:standards*; D005858:Germany; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D019300:Medical Errors / Q000517:prevention & control*; D010819:Physician's Role; D017410:Practice Guidelines as Topic; D014682:Vena Cava, Inferior / Q000601:surgery*