Abstract
Inferior vena cava filter fracture (FF) may cause life-threatening complications, including cardiac tamponade, although the actual prevalence remains unclear. Therefore, we investigated the incidence of FF. Data on fracture incidence with filter brands, filter positions [suprarenal (SR) vs. infrarenal (IR)], and follow-up durations were collected from the databases of eight hospitals. Of 532 patients, Günther Tulip (GT), Trap/OptEase (TE/OE), ALN and VenaTech (VT) were implanted in 345, 147, 38 and 2 patients, respectively. Of these, filter retrieval was attempted in 110 (21.7%) patients and was successful in 106 (96.4%). Of the remaining 426 patients, FFs were observed in two (0.7%) of 270 GT filters and 19 (14.1%) of 135 TE/OE filters. Fragment embolization occurred in one patient with a GT filter (50.0%) and three with a TE/OE filter (15.8%) with a total follow-up interval of 718.0 ± 1019.4days. FF occurred more frequently in TE/OE than in GT filters (p < 0.001). Kaplan-Meier estimates showed significantly higher fracture-free rates for GT than TE/OE (p < 0.001) and IR-TE/OE than SR-TE/OE (p < 0.05). TE/OE filters are not suitable for permanent implantation due to the relatively early and high fracture rates.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
