, Benjamin Hohlfelder2 and Samuel Z. Goldhaber3
(1)
Cardiovascular Division, Harvard Medical School Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
(2)
Department of Pharmacy Services, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
(3)
Thrombosis Research Group, Harvard Medical School Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
Abstract
Inferior vena cava (IVC) filter placement is indicated in patients with acute pulmonary embolism (PE) or deep vein thrombosis (PE) who have contraindications to anticoagulation or who have recurrent PE despite therapeutic anticoagulation. IVC filter insertion may be considered on a case-by-case basis for patients with acute PE who are able to receive therapeutic anticoagulation but who have limited cardiopulmonary reserve and in whom a subsequent PE would likely be fatal. Retrievable IVC filters are inserted to provide temporary protection from PE during such periods of increased vulnerability or when interruption of anticoagulation is necessary. IVC filters should be retrieved as soon as they are no longer necessary.
Keywords
Deep vein thrombosisInferior vena cava filterPulmonary embolismVenous thromboembolismSelf-Assessment Questions
1.
Which of the following statements regarding IVC filters for treatment of patients with acute PE is false?
(a)
IVC filters are indicated for patients with contraindications to anticoagulation or with recurrent PE despite therapeutic anticoagulation.
(b)
IVC filters decrease the risk of PE in the short-term but increase the long-term risk of deep vein thrombosis (DVT).
(c)
Retrievable IVC filters should be left in place permanently even if a transient contraindication to anticoagulation has resolved.
(d)
IVC filters have little impact on the in-hospital mortality rate of hemodynamically stable patients with acute PE.
2.
In which of the following patients is IVC filter retrieval appropriate?
(a)
A 92-year-old woman with history of massive PE and recurrent severe upper gastrointestinal bleeding episodes due to gastric antral vascular ectasia.
(b)
A 24-year-old man with extensive left lower extremity DVT and bilateral PE following a motor vehicle accident with multiple fractures who was restarted on therapeutic anticoagulation 3 months ago and has been stable.
(c)
A 69-year-old man with early stage colon cancer status resection complicated by post-operative bilateral PE who is planned for ostomy reversal in 3 months.
(d)
An 82-year-old woman with cerebral amyloid angiopathy complicated by intracranial hemorrhage while on therapeutic anticoagulation for unprovoked bilateral PE.
Clinical Vignette
A 44-year-old morbidly obese man with ventral hernia repair 3 weeks prior presented to the Emergency Department with 48 h of progressive dyspnea at rest and with exertion. One week prior to presentation, the patient noted right calf cramping with ambulation. He attributed this to being relatively sedentary since his surgery. On physical examination, he was tachycardic to 130 beats per minute, hypotensive with a blood pressure of 82/44 mmHg, and hypoxemic with an oxygen saturation of 88 % on room air. His electrocardiogram was notable for sinus tachycardia to the 130 s. His chest X-ray demonstrated a small left pleural effusion. Contrast-enhanced chest computed tomogram (CT) demonstrated a large bilateral PE and right ventricular (RV) enlargement with an RV diameter-to-left ventricular (LV) diameter ratio of 1.4. In the Emergency Department, the patient’s blood pressure increased to 100/68 mmHg following a 1 L normal saline bolus. He was started on intravenous unfractionated heparin as a bolus and then continuous infusion with a target activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT) of 60–80 s. Right lower extremity venous ultrasound demonstrated common femoral, femoral, popliteal, gastrocnemius, peroneal, and posterior tibial DVT. Because of the large reservoir of thrombus in the patient’s right lower extremity and the concern that a subsequent PE might be fatal, the Emergency Department physician consulted the hospital’s multidisciplinary PE Response Team. The PE Response Team determined that a fibrinolytic based approach was contraindicated given his recent surgery and that his morbid obesity increased the operative risk of surgical pulmonary embolectomy. Therefore, the PE Response Team arranged for a retrievable IVC filter to be placed in the Cardiac Catheterization Laboratory (Fig. 8.1). After insertion of the IVC filter, the patient was admitted to the Intensive Care Unit and then transferred to a floor bed the following day. He remained hemodynamically stable, and his dyspnea and hypoxemia resolved on therapeutic anticoagulation. He was subsequently discharged on oral anticoagulation with warfarin and arranged to follow-up in Vascular Medicine clinic. Six weeks after hospital discharge, he had fully recovered, and his Vascular Medicine physician arranged for IVC filter retrieval (Figs. 8.2, 8.3, and 8.4).
Fig. 8.1
Successful insertion of a retrievable inferior vena cava (IVC) filter (arrow) under fluoroscopy in a 44-year-old morbidly obese man with a ventral hernia repair 3 weeks prior who presented with severe dyspnea and was diagnosed with massive pulmonary embolism (PE) and extensive right lower extremity deep vein thrombosis (DVT)
Fig. 8.2
Fluoroscopy demonstrating a well-positioned intact retrievable inferior vena cava (IVC) filter 6 weeks after insertion in a 44-year-old morbidly obese man with a massive pulmonary embolism (PE) and extensive right lower extremity deep vein thrombosis (DVT). The retrieval hook (arrow) is easily accessible from a superior approach
Fig. 8.3
Contrast cavogram demonstrating a patent inferior vena cava (IVC) and a retrievable IVC filter that is free of thrombus 6 weeks after insertion in a 44-year-old morbidly obese man with a massive pulmonary embolism (PE) and extensive right lower extremity deep vein thrombosis (DVT)
Fig. 8.4
Completion contrast cavogram following inferior vena cava (IVC) filter retrieval 6 weeks after insertion in a 44-year-old morbidly obese man with a massive pulmonary embolism (PE) and extensive right lower extremity deep vein thrombosis (DVT). The IVC filter has been completed retrieved, and the IVC appears intact without thrombus
An analysis of data from the National Hospital Discharge Survey spanning 1979–2006 demonstrated that utilization of both permanent and retrievable IVC filters has increased in the U.S. [1]. IVC filter insertion increased threefold from 2001 through 2006. A retrospective community-based study demonstrated that IVC filter insertion was deemed appropriate in only half of cases [2].
Indications
IVC filter insertion should be considered in patients with objectively-confirmed acute PE or DVT and contraindications to anticoagulation or with recurrent PE despite therapeutic anticoagulation (Table 8.1) [3–5]. Insertion of an IVC filter may be considered on an individual basis for patients with acute PE who are able to receive therapeutic anticoagulation but who have limited cardiopulmonary reserve, such that a subsequent PE would likely be fatal. The patient in the Clinical Vignette provides an example of a patient with acute PE who was able to receive therapeutic anticoagulation but was not eligible for any advanced therapies and in whom a subsequent PE would have been potentially fatal. An IVC filter was inserted in this patient until he had survived the acute vulnerable period.
Table 8.1
Major indications for inferior vena cava (IVC) filter insertion