Over the last 2 decades, there has been an exponential rise in placement of retrievable inferior vena cava (IVC) filters, while the retrieval rate has remained steadily low. Approaches to increasing filter retrieval rates have been extensively studied.
Conclusion:
This review presents an up-to-date review of reported data-driven variables that affect retrieval rates of IVC filters, with a focus on clinical, technical, and process factors.
DalenJE. Pulmonary embolism: what have we learned since Virchow?: treatment and prevention. Chest. 2002;122(5):1801–1817.
2.
KaufmanJAKinneyTBStreiffMB. Guidelines for the use of retrievable and convertible vena cava filters: report from the Society of Interventional Radiology Multidisciplinary Consensus Conference. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2006;17(3):449–459.
3.
DeYoungEMinochaJ. Inferior vena cava filters: guidelines, best practice, and expanding indications. Semin Intervent Radiol. 2016;33(2):65–70.
4.
DuszakRParkerLLevinDCRaoVM. Placement and removal of inferior vena cava filters: national trends in the medicare population. J Am Coll Radiol. 2011;8(7):483–489.
5.
DecoususHBarralFGBuchmuller-CordierA. Eight-year follow-up of patients with permanent vena cava filters in the prevention of pulmonary embolism the PREPIC (Prévention du Risque d’Embolie Pulmonaire par Interruption Cave) randomized study. Circulation. 2005;112(3):416–422.
ReddySLakhterVZackCJZhaoHChatterjeeSBashirR. Association between contemporary trends in inferior vena cava filter placement and the 2010 US Food and Drug Administration advisory. JAMA Intern Med. 2017;177(9):1373–1374.
10.
DabbaghONagamNChitima-MatsigaRBearellySBearellyD. Retrievable inferior vena cava filters are not getting retrieved where is the gap?Thromb Res. 2010;126(6):493–497.
11.
GyangEZayedMHarrisEJLeeJTDalmanRLMellMW. Factors impacting follow-up care after placement of temporary inferior vena cava filters. J Vasc Surg. 2013;58(2):440–445.
12.
AlbrechtRMGarweTCarterSMMaurerAJ. Retrievable inferior vena cava filters in trauma patients: factors that influence removal rate and an argument for institutional protocols. Am J Surg. 2012;203(3):297–302.
13.
SiracuseJJBazroonAAGillHL. Risk factors of nonretrieval of retrievable inferior vena cava filters. Ann Vasc Surg. 2015;29(2):318–321.
14.
YoonDYVavraAKEiflerAC. Why temporary filters are not removed: clinical predictors in 1,000 consecutive cases. Ann Vasc Surg. 2017;42(5):64–70.
15.
SmithSCShanksCGuyGYangXDowellJD. Social and demographic factors influencing inferior vena cava filter retrieval at a single institution in the United States. Cardioasc Intervent Radiol. 2015;38(5):1186–1191.
WeinbergIAbtahianFDeBiasiR. Effect of delayed inferior vena cava filter retrieval after early initiation of anticoagulation. Am J Cardiol. 2014;113(2):389–394.
18.
SutphinPDReisSPMcKuneARavanzoMKalvaSPPillaiAK. Improving inferior vena cava filter retrieval rates with the define, measure, analyze, improve, control methodology. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2015;26(4):491–498.
19.
WangSLChaHALinJR. Impact of physician education and a dedicated inferior vena cava filter tracking system on inferior vena cava filter use and retrieval rates across a large US health care region. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2016;27(5):740–748.
LynchFC. A method for following patients with retrievable inferior vena cava filters: results and lessons learned from the first 1,100 patients. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2011;22(11):1507–1512.
22.
InagakiEFarberAEslamiMH. Improving the retrieval rate of inferior vena cava filters with a multidisciplinary team approach. J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord. 2016;4(3):276–282.
23.
KalinaMBartleyMCipolleMTinkoffGStevensonSFuldaG. Improved removal rates for retrievable inferior vena cava filters with the use of a ‘filter registry.’Am Surg. 2012;78(1):94–97.
IrwinEByrnesMSchultzS. A systematic method for follow-up improves removal rates for retrievable inferior vena cava filters in a trauma patient population. J Trauma. 2010;69(4):866–869.
26.
MarquessJSBurkeCTBeechamAH. Factors associated with failed retrieval of the Günther Tulip inferior vena cava filter. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2008;19(9):1321–1327.
27.
AvgerinosEDBathJStevensJ. Technical and patient-related characteristics associated with challenging retrieval of inferior vena cava filters. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2013;46(3):353–359.
28.
HermsenJLIbeleARFaucherLDNaleJKSchurrMJKudskKA. Retrievable inferior vena cava filters in high-risk trauma and surgical patients: factors influencing successful removal. World J Surg. 2008;32(7):1444–1449.
29.
BinkertCASasadeuszKStavropoulosSW. Retrievability of the recovery vena cava filter after dwell times longer than 180 days. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2006;17(2 pt 1):299–302.
30.
HongSParkKMJeonY. Can pre-retrieval computed tomography predict the difficult removal of an implementing an inferior vena cava filter?Vasc Specialist Int. 2016;32(4):175–179.
