Outcomes and Direct Costs of Inferior Vena Cava Filter Placement and Retrieval within the IR and Surgical Settings

Abstract

PurposeTo compare the outcomes and costs of inferior vena cava (IVC) filter placement and retrieval in the interventional radiology (IR) and surgical departments at a tertiary-care center. Materials and MethodsRetrospective review was performed of 142 sequential outpatient IVC filter placements and 244 retrievals performed in the IR suite and operating room (OR) from 2013 to 2016. Patient demographic data, procedural characteristics, outcomes, and direct costs were compared between cohorts. ResultsTechnical success rates of 100% were achieved for both IR and OR filter placements, and 98% of filters were successfully retrieved by IR means, compared with 83% in the OR (P < .01). Fluoroscopy time was similar for IR and OR filter insertions, but IR retrievals required half the fluoroscopy time, with an average of 9 minutes vs 18 minutes in the OR (P = .02). There was no significant difference between cohorts in the incidences of complications for filter retrievals, but more postprocedural complications were observed for OR placements (8%) vs IR placements (1%; P = .05). The most severe complication occurred during an OR filter retrieval, resulting in entanglement of the snare device and conversion to an emergent open filter removal by vascular surgery. Direct costs were approximately 20% higher for OR vs IR IVC filter placements ($2,246 vs $2,671; P = .01). ConclusionsFilter placements are equally successfully performed in IR and OR settings, but OR patients experienced significantly higher postprocedural complication rates and incurred higher costs. In contrast, higher technical success rates and shorter fluoroscopy times were observed for IR filter retrievals compared with those performed in the OR.