Smoking in a local community in Singapore.

H. P. Lee,K. S. Ng,K. Chan,H. L. Liang

Singapore Medical Journal

Abstract:

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Association of Inferior Vena Cava Filter Placement With Rates of Pulmonary Embolism in Patients With Cancer and Acute Lower Extremity Deep Venous Thrombosis

Samyuktha Balabhadra,Joshua D Kuban,Stephen Lee,Steven Yevich,Zeyad Metwalli,Colin J McCarthy,Steven Y Huang,Alda Tam,Sanjay Gupta,Sunil A Sheth,Rahul A Sheth

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.11079

2020-07-01

Abstract:Importance: Venous thromboembolism is the second overall leading cause of death for patients with cancer, and there is an approximately 2-fold increase in fatal pulmonary embolism (PE) in patients with cancer. Inferior vena cava (IVC) filters are designed to prevent PE, but defining the appropriate use of IVC filters in patients with cancer remains a substantial unmet clinical need. Objective: To evaluate the association of IVC filters with the development of PE in patients with cancer and deep venous thrombosis (DVT). Design, setting, and participants: A population-based cohort study was conducted using administrative data on 88 585 patients from the state inpatient databases for California (2005-2011) and Florida (2005-2014). Based on diagnostic and procedure codes, patients with cancer and acute lower extremity DVT were identified. All subsequent hospital visits for these patients were evaluated for the placement of an IVC filter, the development of new PE, the development of new DVT, and in-hospital mortality. Data analysis was performed from September 1 to December 1, 2019. Exposures: Placement of an IVC filter. Main outcomes and measures: The association of IVC filter placement with rates of new PE and DVT was estimated using a propensity score matching algorithm and competing risk analysis. Results: The study cohort comprised 88 585 patients (45 074 male; median age, 71.0 years [range, 1.0-104.0 years]) with malignant neoplasms who presented to a health care institution with a diagnosis of acute lower extremity DVT. Of these patients, 33 740 (38.1%) underwent IVC filter placement; patients with risk factors such as upper gastrointestinal bleeding (odds ratio, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.29-1.37), intracranial hemorrhage (odds ratio, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.19-1.24), and coagulopathy (odds ratio, 1.09; 95% CI, 1.08-1.10) were more likely to receive an IVC filter. A total of 4492 patients (5.1%) developed a new PE after their initial DVT diagnosis. There was a significant improvement in PE-free survival for these patients compared with those who did not receive IVC filters across the full, unbalanced study cohort as well as after propensity score matching and competing risk analysis (hazard ratio, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.64-0.75; P < .001). Furthermore, IVC filter placement reduced the development of PE in patients with very high-risk malignant neoplasms (eg, pancreaticobiliary cancer), high-risk malignant neoplasms (eg, lung cancer), and low-risk malignant neoplasms (eg, prostate cancer). After accounting for anticoagulation use and imbalanced risk factors, IVC filter placement did not increase the risk of new DVT development. Conclusions and relevance: This study suggests that, for patients with cancer and DVT and bleeding risk factors, IVC filter placement is associated with an increased rate of PE-free survival.
Inferior vena cava filter thromboprophylaxis in surgical cancer patients

Mina S. Makary,Mensur Koso,Matthew Yoder

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/jso.27734

2024-06-13

Journal of Surgical Oncology

Abstract:Background and Objectives This study evaluated the utilization and outcomes of inferior vena cava (IVC) filters as thromboprophylaxis in cancer patients undergoing surgery. Methods This single‐center retrospective study analyzed baseline patient characteristics and clinical outcomes of surgical cancer patients who received perioperative prophylactic IVC filters. Primary clinical endpoints included venous thromboembolism (VTE) incidence and filter complications. A statistical correlative analysis was conducted to identify risk factors related to pulmonary embolism (PE), deep vein thrombosis (DVT), and filter thrombi, as well as advanced technique filter removal and mortality at 6 months. Results A total of 252 surgical oncology patients (median age, 59; female 51%) received IVC filters for the perioperative prevention of PE. Primary surgical sites included spine (n = 91, 36%), orthopedic extremity/joint (n = 49, 19%), genitourinary (n = 47, 19%), brain/cranial (n = 40, 16%), abdominal (n = 18, 7%), multisite (n = 4, 2%), and chest (n = 3, 1%). Moreover, 15% of patients experienced DVTs in the postplacement preretrieval period, while 2% (n = 6) of patients experienced definitive PEs. A total of 36% of IVC filters were ultimately retrieved, with an average filter dwell time of 7.4 months. Complications occurred in one retrieval. Conclusion Prophylactic perioperative IVC filters in surgical cancer patients resulted in minimal complications while ultimately resulting in a low incidence of PE.

oncology,surgery
Outcomes after Vena Cava Filter Use in Patients with Cancer-Associated Venous Thromboembolism and Contraindications to Anticoagulation

Andrés Quezada,David Jiménez,Behnood Bikdeli,Alfonso Muriel,Mario Aramberri,Luciano López-Jiménez,Joan Carles Sahuquillo,Remedios Otero,Angelo Porfidia,Manuel Monreal,RIETE Investigators

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0040-1710589

Abstract:Background: The association between the use of inferior vena cava filters (IVCFs) and outcomes among patients with cancer-associated thromboembolism (CT) and contraindications to anticoagulation remains unclear. Methods: In this prospective cohort study of patients with CT from the Registro Informatizado de la Enfermedad TromboEmbólica Registry, we assessed the association between IVCF insertion due to contraindication to anticoagulation and the outcomes of all-cause mortality, pulmonary embolism (PE)-related mortality, recurrent thromboembolism, and major bleeding rates through 30 days after initiation of treatment. We used propensity score matching to adjust for the likelihood of receiving a filter. For outcomes assessment, we implemented generalized estimating equation methods to incorporate the matched-pairs design, and adjusted for covariates that remained unbalanced after matching. Results: Of the 17,005 patients with CT, 270 underwent IVCF placement because of contraindication to anticoagulation. Of those, 247 were successfully matched with 247 patients treated without a filter. Propensity score-matched pairs showed a nonsignificantly lower risk of all-cause death (12.2% vs. 17.0%; p = 0.13), and a significantly lower risk of PE-related mortality (0.8% vs. 4.0%; p = 0.04) for patients receiving IVCFs compared with those who did not. While there was no significant difference in the rate of major bleeding (6.1% vs. 5.7%; p = 0.85), risk-adjusted recurrent rates were higher for patients who received IVCFs compared with those who did not (7.3% vs. 3.2%; p = 0.05). Conclusion: In patients with CT and a contraindication to anticoagulation, IVCF insertion was associated with a lower risk of PE-related death, and a higher risk of recurrences.
Factors Associated With Inferior Vena Cava Filter Placement and Retrieval for Patients With Cancer-Associated Thrombosis

Subhash Edupuganti,Mengbing Li,Zhenke Wu,Tanima Basu,Geoffrey D Barnes,Marc Carrier,Suman L Sood,Jennifer J Griggs,Jordan K Schaefer

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjmed.2021.11.006

Abstract:Background: Venous thromboembolism is a leading cause of death in patients with cancer. Inferior vena cava filters are utilized to mitigate the risk of pulmonary embolism for patients who have contraindication to, or failure of, anticoagulation. Methods: We reviewed an insurance claims database to identify adults receiving cancer-directed therapy and had a new diagnosis of venous thromboembolism. We then evaluated clinical and sociodemographic characteristics in patients with and without filter placement and retrieval. Results: There were 25,788 patients (mean [SD] age: 68.3 [12.7] years) who met the study inclusion criteria, with 2111 individuals (8.2%) undergoing filter placement. Filter placement was associated with the type of thrombosis, malignancy, recent surgery, comorbidities, and income. A total of 137 patients (6.5%) newly started anticoagulation within 3 days of filter placement, and 612 (29%) patients received anticoagulation within 30 days after filter placement. Despite this, only 159 (7.5%) patients had their filters retrieved during the study period. Patients with income of $75-99K (odds ratio 2.13, P = .012) or above $100K (odds ratio 1.8, P = .038) were more likely to have filter retrieval compared with those with income <$50K. Filter retrieval was also more likely in younger patients and those with fewer comorbidities or without central nervous system or lung malignancies. Conclusions: Inferior vena cava filter placement and retrieval are associated with several sociodemographic factors. Filter retrieval rates are low despite re-initiation of anticoagulation in many patients. Efforts are needed to address disparities in filter use and improve retrieval rates.
Comparison of inferior vena cava filter use and outcomes between cancer and non-cancer patients in a tertiary hospital

Néstor López,Carles Zamora-Martinez,Marc Montoya,Cristina Gabara,María Ortiz,Jesús Aibar

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.thromres.2024.02.020

IF: 10.407

2024-02-28

Thrombosis Research

Abstract:Background While accepted indications for the use of inferior vena cava filter (IVCF) in patients with a venous thromboembolism (VTE) have remained stable, their use continues to be frequent. Retrieval rates are still low, being particularly notable in the population with cancer. This study aims to review the rate of adherence to guidelines recommendation and to compare retrieval rates and complications in both cancer and non-cancer patients. Methods A retrospective study was performed including 185 patients in whom an IVCF was placed in Hospital Clinic of Barcelona. Baseline characteristics, clinical outcomes, and IVCF-related outcomes were analyzed. A strongly recommended indication (SRI) was considered if it was included in all the revised clinical guidelines and non-strongly if it was included in only some. Results Overall, 47 % of the patients had a SRI, without differences between groups. IVCF placement after 29 days from the VTE event was more frequent in the cancer group (46.1 vs. 17.7 %). Patients with cancer (48.1 % of the cohort) were older, with higher co-morbidity and bleeding risk. Anticoagulation resumption (75.3 % vs. 92.7 %) and IVCF retrieval (50.6 % vs. 66.7 %) were significantly less frequent in cancer patients. No significant differences were found regarding IVCF-related complications, hemorrhagic events and VTE recurrence. Conclusions SRI of IVCF placement was found in less than half of the patients. Cancer patients had higher rates of IVCF placement without indication and lower anticoagulation resumption and IVCF retrieval ratios, despite complications were similar in both groups.

peripheral vascular disease,hematology
The Epstein–Barr virus nuclear antigen‐1 may act as a transforming suppressor of the HER2/neu oncogene

T. Chuang,Tzong-Der Way,Yen-Shing Lin,Ying‐Chu Lee,S. Law,M. Kao

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0014-5793(02)03658-X

2002-12-04

FEBS Letters

Abstract:
PHOTOCHEMISTRY OF POLYENES

E. Land

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-1097.1975.tb06751.x

1975-12-01

Photochemistry and Photobiology

Abstract:Polyenes are molecules containing several noncyclic conjugated carbon-carbon double bonds. A number are important in vision and photosynthesis. Polyenes have for long been systems where the comparison of theoretical and spectroscopic predictions with experimental findings is particularly fruitful. In the case of retinal, the visual chromophore, both theoretical and experimental studies are often aimed towards characterising the excited state precursors of the photoisomerisation step which, in the visual pigment rhodopsin, triggers the neural impluse [27, 311. This short review will refer to some recent experimental studies of singlet and triplet excited states formed by the interaction of light with polyenes, and subsequent chemical changes resulting from the decay of such excited states. The predominant final photochemical change is isomerisation. More detailed reviews of related topics have appeared recently: The structure and spectra of the chromophore of the visual pigments [13]; theoretical studies of the visual chromophore [ 151, and linear polyene electronic structure and spectroscopy [16].
Inferior Vena Cava Filter in Cancer Patients: On Whom Should We Be Placing Them?

Marcelo Passos Teivelis,Isabela Hohlenwerger Schettini,Bruno Soriano Pignataro,Guilherme Andre Zottele Bomfim,Guilherme Centofanti,Igor Yoshio Imagawa Fonseca,Mariana Krutman,Rafael Noronha Cavalcante,Kenji Nishinari,Guilherme Yazbek

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avsg.2020.08.123

IF: 1.5

2021-02-01

Annals of Vascular Surgery

Abstract:BackgroundStandard treatment for venous thromboembolism is anticoagulation; vena cava filter placement is an alternative in special situations. We aimed to evaluate the outcomes in cancer patients undergoing filter placement in a cancer center during a 10-year-period and assess which preoperatory variables were associated with poorer survival.MethodsRetrospective uni-center analysis over a 10-year period was carried out in cancer patients who had undergone placement of vena cava filter. Early deaths were those that occurred less than 30 days after the filter placement, or that occurred during the same hospital stay of the placementResults250 patients were analyzed. 51.6% were female; 77.2% had proximal lower limb DVT; 34.8% had contraindications to anticoagulation; 32.8% presented bleeding after the onset of anticoagulation and 18.4% had the filter implanted because they were going to undergo surgery, and could not be anticoagulated immediately after. 51.2% of the filters were removable.However, only 2 had the filter removed. 59.2% had metastatic disease at the time of filter placement. 31.2% fulfilled criteria for "early" death. Of those, 34 patients were put in palliative care after filter insertion (median=13.5 days). Body mass index> 18kg/m2, absence of metastatic disease and filter placement during the same anesthesia of another surgery (especially if elective and curative) were associated with a higher chance of survivalConclusionMultidisciplinary evaluation (and possibly consideration for palliation) should take place before the decision to insert a vena cava filter in severe oncological cases depending on overall status. Patients with a greater chance of survival at a 3 or 5 years interval seem to be those whose filters were placed in the peri-operative context of other surgeries (specially elective and curative), who were not undernourished and whose disease was not metastatic at that time. For patients who survived, an active investigation protocol for filter removal should be implemented.

surgery,peripheral vascular disease
Anatomical pathology in the 21st century: the great paradigm shift.

W. Murphy

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/J.HUMPATH.2007.01.016

IF: 3.526

2007-07-01

Human Pathology

Abstract:
Role of prophylactic filter placement in the endovascular treatment of symptomatic thrombosis in the central veins

Zhihui Liang,Ruiyang Han,Youzhi Qu,Wei Cao,Jingguo Cui

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.thromres.2014.04.009

Abstract:Objectives: To evaluate the role of filter implantation in reducing the incidence of fatal pulmonary embolism during the endovascular treatment of thrombosis in the major tributary of the superior vena cava (SVC). Methods: From October 2004 to October 2008, we conducted a cohort study of 40 patients with thrombosis of the central veins who were preparing for endovascular interventions and received or did not receive filter. The symptom scores were measured, the incidence of pulmonary embolism (PE) was observed, and patient follow-up studies were conducted for three years. Results: One week after therapy, the symptom score improved in both groups compared with before therapy (P <0.001), but no significant difference was found between the scores of the two groups (P >0.05). Four patients in the control group died from PEs after therapy, but no patients in the filter group presented evidence of PE. The survival rates at 1, 2, and 3 years (72.9%, 50%, and 27.1%, respectively) for the filter group were higher than those for the control group (47.6%, 19.0% and 14.3%, respectively; P =0.015). The survival time of patients in the filter group with bronchogenic carcinoma (18 ± 2 months) was longer than that of the patients in the control group (12 ± 2 months) after the endovascular treatment (P <0.001). Conclusions: Prophylactic filter placement could be a safe and effective method for preventing PE in pre- or post-endovascular-treated patients with thrombi in their central veins.
Retrievable inferior vena cava filter to prevent pulmonary embolism in patients with fractures and deep venous thrombosis of lower extremities: a single-center experience

Junjie Huang,Xiangchen Dai,Xiujun Zhang,Junhai Li,Mei Huang,Cunfa Liu,Ziyuan Zhao,Lei Xiao,Liguo Liu,Nan Li,Jingbo Kong,Xiaolei Han

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/03000605211006591

Abstract:Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness of inserting a retrievable inferior vena cava filter (IVCF) to prevent pulmonary embolism (PE) in patients with bone fractures and acute deep venous thrombosis (DVT) before major orthopedic surgery. Methods: Clinical data of patients with fractures and acute DVT who underwent IVCF insertion were analyzed. The patients were divided into above-knee DVT (AKDVT), popliteal vein thrombosis (PVT), and below-knee DVT (BKDVT) groups. Results: An IVCF was successfully implanted in 964 patients, among whom 929 were followed up (335, 470, and 124 in AKDVT, PVT, and BKDVT groups, respectively). There was no significant difference in the incidence of filter thrombosis among the groups (11.04%, 11.70%, and 8.06%, respectively). No symptomatic PE occurred during follow-up. The mean filter indwelling time was 18.4 ± 4.3 days, and the total filter removal rate was 76.87%. There was no significant difference in the rate of filter implantation, retrieval, complications, or mortality among the groups. Conclusions: Retrievable filters can effectively prevent PE before orthopedic surgery in patients with fractures and acute DVT of the lower limbs. AKDVT more readily forms a ≥1-cm thrombus in the IVCF than does BKDVT, and PVT more readily forms a <1-cm thrombus than does AKDVT.
[Efficacy of Anticoagulation on Patency Post-Permanent Inferior Vena Caval Filter Placements].

Yong-le Xu,Guo-xiang Dong,Jun Zhao

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.issn.0529-5815.2010.02.004

2010-01-01

Abstract:OBJECTIVE:To discuss the efficacy of anticoagulation on patency post-permanent inferior vena caval filter (IVCF) placements.METHODS:The patients with deep vein thrombosis (DVT) of the lower extremity who were accepted permanent IVCF placement from December 2001 to December 2007 were reviewed retrospectively. Data on vital status, filter thromboembolism, anticoagulation time, and so on were obtained through follow-up. One hundred and thirty eight patients (75 male and 63 female) with a mean age of 65 years were enrolled in the study. All the patients were divided into non-anticoagulation group, anticoagulation group A with taking warfarin less than 6 months, or anticoagulation group B with taking warfarin more than 6 months. chi(2) test, t test, Kaplan-Meier survival curve, Log-rank test were used for statistics analysis.RESULTS:Sixteen patients died, and 1 of them died of pulmonary embolism. Including the 1 patient mentioned before, there were 19 patients (13.8%) suffered from filter thromboembolism. Upon chi(2) test, there were no significant differences (P = 0.288) on the patency rates between non-anticoagulation, anticoagulation group A and anticoagulation group B (87.8%, 75.0%, and 88.3% respectively). Upon Kaplan-Meier survival analysis, there were still no significant differences (P = 0.227) on the mean patency time and the cumulate rates of patency at the 1st or 3rd year between the 3 groups (87.1%, 80.0%, 94.8% and 87.1%, 74.3%, 85.4% respectively).CONCLUSION:Anticoagulation has no efficacy on patency post-permanent IVCF placements.
A prospective ex vivo biomechanical analysis of retrievable inferior vena cava filters

Kwok M Ho,Jenny Chamberlain,Sana Nasim,Frederick B Rogers,Alan Kop

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvsv.2022.04.007

Abstract:Objective: In the present study, we investigated the structural integrity of inferior vena cava (IVC) filters after their retrieval. Methods: A prospective ex vivo biomechanical analysis was performed of the structural integrity of 100 IVC filters used in a randomized controlled trial to evaluate the effectiveness of prophylactic IVC filters in preventing mortality or symptomatic pulmonary embolism in major trauma patients. Results: Of the 100 included patients, 7 (7%) had required more than one attempt to remove the filter. The median duration of the filter left in situ was 54 days (interquartile range, 17-101 days). During the initial attempt to remove six filters (6%), thrombi were found entrapped and required 4 weeks of systemic anticoagulation therapy before the filters could be removed in a second attempt. A positive correlation was found between the duration of the filter left in situ and the loss in metallic elasticity of the nitinol alloy of the filter struts (Pearson correlation coefficient, 0.232; P = .008). One filter was adherent to the IVC wall and required open surgical removal 227 days after its initial placement. One of the six long struts of the filter had been fractured during the removal process, with evidence of hardening to bending stress in the remaining five struts of the fractured filter compared with the struts of the 25 intact filters. Fibrous endothelial tissue (73%) and thrombi (33%) adherent to the retrieved filters were frequently observed. The presence of adherent fibrous tissue was not significantly related statistically to the duration of the filter left in situ (P = .353) but was more common among the patients who had had a delay in receiving prophylactic anticoagulation therapy (mean difference, 2 days; 95% confidence interval, 0.6-3.3; P = .039). Conclusions: Metallic fatigue might account for IVC filter strut fractures. Fibrous endothelial tissue adherent to the filters was common, especially for those with a delay in receiving prophylactic anticoagulation therapy.
The impact of renal function on clinical outcomes of patients with cancer-associated isolated distal deep vein thrombosis: Insights from the ONCO DVT study

Daisuke Sueta,Yugo Yamashita,Takeshi Morimoto,Nao Muraoka,Michihisa Umetsu,Yuji Nishimoto,Takuma Takada,Yoshito Ogihara,Tatsuya Nishikawa,Nobutaka Ikeda,Kazunori Otsui,Yukari Tsubata,Masaaki Shoji,Ayumi Shikama,Yutaka Hosoi,Yasuhiro Tanabe,Ryuki Chatani,Kengo Tsukahara,Naohiko Nakanishi,Kitae Kim,Satoshi Ikeda,Makoto Mo,Takeshi Kimura,Kenichi Tsujita

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.thromres.2024.01.021

IF: 10.407

2024-02-03

Thrombosis Research

Abstract:Background The multicenter, open-label, randomized clinical trial ONCO DVT compared 3-month and 12-month edoxaban treatment regimens for isolated distal deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and suggested potential benefits of prolonged edoxaban treatment in terms of thrombotic risk. However, the risk-benefit balance of prolonged edoxaban treatment in patients with renal function remains unclear. Objectives To compare the safety and efficacy of 3-month and 12-month edoxaban treatment regimens in patients with cancer-associated isolated distal DVT and different renal functions. Methods This pre-specified subgroup analysis of the ONCO DVT study included 601 patients divided into subgroups according to renal function using a 50 mL/min creatinine clearance (Ccr) cutoff. The primary endpoint was symptomatic recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE) and VTE-related death at 12 months and the major secondary endpoint was major bleeding at 12 months. Results Among the 601 patients, 131 (21.8 %) comprised the renal dysfunction subgroup. The primary endpoint occurred in 6 (9.7 %) and 1 (1.4 %) patients in the 3-month and 12-month edoxaban groups in the renal dysfunction subgroup, respectively, and in 16 (6.6 %) and 2 (0.9 %) patients in the no renal dysfunction subgroup, respectively. The major secondary endpoint occurred in 9 (14.5 %) and 7 (10.1 %) patients in the 12-month and 3-month edoxaban groups in the renal dysfunction subgroup, and in 13 (5.3 %) and 21 (9.3 %) patients in the no renal dysfunction subgroup, respectively. Conclusions A 12-month edoxaban regiment was superior to a 3-month treatment in terms of thrombotic risk irrespective of renal function. A higher bleeding risk was not identified in patients with renal dysfunction who received prolonged edoxaban treatment.

peripheral vascular disease,hematology
Structure determination of proteins in solution by nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy.

K. Chary,H. Atreya

Journal of Postgraduate Medicine

Abstract:
Venous thromboembolism in cancer patients: report of baseline data from the multicentre, prospective Cancer-VTE Registry

Yasuo Ohashi,Masataka Ikeda,Hideo Kunitoh,Mitsuru Sasako,Takuji Okusaka,Hirofumi Mukai,Keiichi Fujiwara,Mashio Nakamura,Mari S Oba,Tetsuya Kimura,Kei Ibusuki,Masato Sakon

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jjco/hyaa112

IF: 2.925

2020-07-27

Japanese Journal of Clinical Oncology

Abstract:Abstract Background The Cancer-VTE Registry evaluates the occurrence and management of venous thromboembolism in Japanese participants with major solid tumors. Using Registry data, we evaluated the frequency of concurrent venous thromboembolism in cancer patients prior to treatment initiation by cancer type. Methods The Cancer-VTE Registry is an ongoing (March 2017–September 2020) prospective cohort study using a nationwide, multicentre clinical registry. Participants aged ≥20 years with colorectal, lung, stomach, pancreatic, breast or gynecologic cancer, confirmed staging, ≥6 months life expectancy post-registration and who had undergone venous thromboembolism screening were managed with routine clinical care. Venous thromboembolism frequency at registration was evaluated. Results Of 9735 participants, 571 (5.9%) had venous thromboembolism at baseline, including asymptomatic [5.5% (n = 540)] and symptomatic venous thromboembolism [0.3% (n = 31)]. Most participants with venous thromboembolism (n = 506, 5.2%) had deep vein thrombosis only; 65 (0.7%) had pulmonary embolism with/without deep vein thrombosis. The prevalence of distal and proximal deep vein thrombosis was 4.8% (n = 466) and 0.9% (n = 83), respectively. The highest prevalence of venous thromboembolism was for pancreatic cancer (8.5%) and the lowest for breast cancer (2.0%). Venous thromboembolism prevalence increased as cancer stage advanced. Conclusions Although there was a marked difference in venous thromboembolism by cancer type, the data suggest that cancer stage is an important risk factor for venous thromboembolism. Thus, metastasis seems a critical risk factor for venous thromboembolism. This is the first demonstration of venous thromboembolism prevalence and risk factors in Japanese cancer patients prior to treatment. Trial registration UMIN000024942.

oncology
Suprarenal inferior vena cava filters: a 20-year single-center experience

Sanjeeva P Kalva,Chrysanthi Chlapoutaki,Stephan Wicky,Alan J Greenfield,Arthur C Waltman,Christos A Athanasoulis

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvir.2008.03.026

Abstract:Purpose: To assess the clinical safety and efficacy of suprarenal inferior vena cava (IVC) filters during long-term follow-up. Materials and methods: In this retrospective study, the authors collected the following data about patients who underwent suprarenal IVC filter placement at their institution between 1988 and 2007: demographics, clinical presentation, indications for filter placement, reasons for placing the filter in the suprarenal IVC, type of filter, frequency of pulmonary embolism (PE) after filter placement, and filter-related problems during follow-up. Results: Seventy patients (32 male and 38 female patients; mean age, 60 years) had suprarenal IVC filters. Sixty-two patients presented with symptoms of venous thromboembolism (VTE) and eight had incidental asymptomatic VTE at imaging. Indications for filter placement were as follows: contraindication to anticoagulation (n = 48), complications and/or failure of anticoagulation (n = 12), added protection (n = 8), and prophylaxis (n = 2). Suprarenal placement was chosen due to IVC thrombus (n = 41), intrinsic and/or extrinsic narrowing of the infrarenal IVC (n = 9), renal and/or gonadal vein thrombus (n = 3), congenital IVC anomalies (n = 6), pelvic mass (n = 5), pregnancy (n = 3), and other reasons (n = 3). The following filters were used: Greenfield (n = 29), Simon Nitinol (n = 5), Vena-Tech (n = 3), TrapEase (n = 22), OptEase (n = 3), Tulip (n = 6), Bird's Nest (n = 1), and Recovery (n = 1). During follow-up (mean, 573 days +/- 953), postfilter PE was suspected in 10 patients; eight patients underwent computed tomography (CT), one of whom had PE at CT. None developed new symptoms of caval thrombosis. Abdominal CT (performed in 30 patients at a mean of 543 days +/- 768) showed thrombus in the filter in three patients, fracture in one patient, and penetration of the IVC wall in two patients. Conclusions: Suprarenal filters are safe and effective in preventing PE. The placement of IVC filters above the renal veins does not carry an added risk of complications.
Detailed assessment of benefits and risks of retrievable inferior vena cava filters on patients with complicated injuries: the da Vinci multicentre randomised controlled trial study protocol

Kwok M Ho,Sudhakar Rao,Stephen Honeybul,Rene Zellweger,Bradley Wibrow,Jeffrey Lipman,Anthony Holley,Alan Kop,Elizabeth Geelhoed,Tomas Corcoran

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-016747

IF: 3.006

2017-07-12

BMJ Open

Abstract:Introduction: Retrievable inferior vena cava (IVC) filters have been increasingly used in patients with major trauma who have contraindications to anticoagulant prophylaxis as a primary prophylactic measure against venous thromboembolism (VTE). The benefits, risks and cost-effectiveness of such strategy are uncertain. Methods and analysis: Patients with major trauma, defined by an estimated Injury Severity Score >15, who have contraindications to anticoagulant VTE prophylaxis within 72 hours of hospitalisation to the study centre will be eligible for this randomised multicentre controlled trial. After obtaining consent from patients, or the persons responsible for the patients, study patients are randomly allocated to either control or IVC filter, within 72 hours of trauma admission, in a 1:1 ratio by permuted blocks stratified by study centre. The primary outcomes are (1) the composite endpoint of (A) pulmonary embolism (PE) as demonstrated by CT pulmonary angiography, high probability ventilation/perfusion scan, transoesophageal echocardiography (by showing clots within pulmonary arterial trunk), pulmonary angiography or postmortem examination during the same hospitalisation or 90-day after trauma whichever is earlier and (B) hospital mortality; and (2) the total cost of treatment including the costs of an IVC filter, total number of CT and ultrasound scans required, length of intensive care unit and hospital stay, procedures and drugs required to treat PE or complications related to the IVC filters. The study started in June 2015 and the final enrolment target is 240 patients. No interim analysis is planned; incidence of fatal PE is used as safety stopping rule for the trial. Ethics and dissemination: Ethics approval was obtained in all four participating centres in Australia. Results of the main trial and each of the secondary endpoints will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal. Trial registration number: ACTRN12614000963628; Pre-results.
Retrievable inferior vena cava filters in neurosurgical patients: Retrieval rates and clinical outcomes

Jan Hansmann,Arman Sheybani,Jeet Minocha,James T Bui,Andrew J Lipnik,Ketan Y Shah,Matthew M Niemeyer,Ron C Gaba,Charles E Ray Jr

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clineuro.2019.02.016

Abstract:Objective: To assess inferior vena cava (IVC) filter retrieval rates and clinical outcomes in neurosurgical patients and to determine patient characteristics associated with filter retrieval. Patients and methods: This single-center retrospective study included 204 consecutive neurosurgical patients (120 men, 84 women; mean age 60 ± 13 years) who underwent retrievable IVC filter insertion between 1/2011-9/2013. Institutional IVC filter database review was used to identify demographic and clinical data, indication for IVC filtration, and IVC filter type. Patients were followed clinically by the neurosurgical, hematology, and interventional radiology services until removal or conversion to a permanent device. Measured outcomes included filter retrieval rates and parameters associated with device removal. Results: The majority of filters were placed for venous thromboembolism (200/204, 98%). Of 204 filters, 38(19%) were retrieved at median 186 days post-placement (range 3-665 days), 112(55%) converted to permanent devices, 44(22%) patients were deceased, and 10(5%) patients were lost to follow-up after transfer to an outside healthcare facility. Patients with subarachnoid hemorrhage (18% vs. 35%, p = 0.025) and malignancy (5% vs. 25%, p = 0.009) were less likely to have filters removed. Filter type (p = 0.475), gender (p = 0.221), neurosurgical procedure (p = 0.639), and insurance status (p = 0.207) did not demonstrate a significant association with filter retrieval. Conclusion: IVC filter retrieval rates in neurosurgical patients are low despite tracking patients clinically in a multidisciplinary setting. Those neurosurgical patients with intracranial hemorrhage or malignancy requiring IVC filters have a lower likelihood of filter retrieval and may benefit from use of permanent devices.
Recurrent Deep Vein Thrombosis (DVT) and Inferior Vena Cava (IVC) Filter: Should a Computed Tomography (CT) Venogram and Inferior Vena Cavagram Be the Standard of Care?

Kathleen Huynh,Anju Sanchala,Ayfer Ekiz

DOI: https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.58529

2024-04-18

Cureus

Abstract:A pulmonary embolism (PE) is a life-threatening complication of deep vein thrombosis (DVT). Although timely anticoagulation is the first-line treatment for DVT, an inferior vena cava (IVC) filter can be considered when anticoagulation is contraindicated. Unfortunately, IVC filters come with complications of their own, including thrombus formation in or around the filter. An 89-year-old man with a past medical history of coronary artery disease, congestive heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and prior DVT status post IVC filter implantation five years ago in 2018 presented with hypotension, dizziness, and syncope. Computed tomography angiography (CTA) of the chest showed bilateral PEs. Venous Doppler ultrasound of the bilateral lower extremities was negative for DVT. CT venogram was performed; however, the contrast filling was suboptimal and as such, a venous thrombosis could not be ruled out. Therefore, an inferior vena cavagram was performed through the right common femoral vein and confirmed a large thrombus positioned cephalad to the IVC filter. A thrombectomy was performed and the IVC filter was replaced given the patient was at high risk for venous thromboembolism recurrence and complications. Although an IVC filter offers some protection from recurrent PEs, it does have risks and complications. As seen in our patient, the IVC filter can be a nidus for the formation of a thrombus which has the risk of dislodging. When evaluating a patient for the source of a PE, it is important to consider prior IVC implant and perform further workups, such as a CT venogram or an inferior vena cavagram, to evaluate for thrombus in or around the filter.

Smoking in a local community in Singapore.

Association of Inferior Vena Cava Filter Placement With Rates of Pulmonary Embolism in Patients With Cancer and Acute Lower Extremity Deep Venous Thrombosis

Inferior vena cava filter thromboprophylaxis in surgical cancer patients

Outcomes after Vena Cava Filter Use in Patients with Cancer-Associated Venous Thromboembolism and Contraindications to Anticoagulation

Factors Associated With Inferior Vena Cava Filter Placement and Retrieval for Patients With Cancer-Associated Thrombosis

Comparison of inferior vena cava filter use and outcomes between cancer and non-cancer patients in a tertiary hospital

The Epstein–Barr virus nuclear antigen‐1 may act as a transforming suppressor of the HER2/neu oncogene

PHOTOCHEMISTRY OF POLYENES

Inferior Vena Cava Filter in Cancer Patients: On Whom Should We Be Placing Them?

Anatomical pathology in the 21st century: the great paradigm shift.

Role of prophylactic filter placement in the endovascular treatment of symptomatic thrombosis in the central veins

Retrievable inferior vena cava filter to prevent pulmonary embolism in patients with fractures and deep venous thrombosis of lower extremities: a single-center experience

[Efficacy of Anticoagulation on Patency Post-Permanent Inferior Vena Caval Filter Placements].

A prospective ex vivo biomechanical analysis of retrievable inferior vena cava filters

The impact of renal function on clinical outcomes of patients with cancer-associated isolated distal deep vein thrombosis: Insights from the ONCO DVT study

Structure determination of proteins in solution by nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy.

Venous thromboembolism in cancer patients: report of baseline data from the multicentre, prospective Cancer-VTE Registry

Suprarenal inferior vena cava filters: a 20-year single-center experience

Detailed assessment of benefits and risks of retrievable inferior vena cava filters on patients with complicated injuries: the da Vinci multicentre randomised controlled trial study protocol

Retrievable inferior vena cava filters in neurosurgical patients: Retrieval rates and clinical outcomes

Recurrent Deep Vein Thrombosis (DVT) and Inferior Vena Cava (IVC) Filter: Should a Computed Tomography (CT) Venogram and Inferior Vena Cavagram Be the Standard of Care?