Abstract:Background:There are different types of vena cava filter (VCF) available in clinical practice. However, limited data exist to determine whether one type is superior to another, and no single VCF is universally recommended in clinical guidelines. The objective of this study was to investigate the safety and efficacy of a novel VCF, Octoparms, for the prevention of pulmonary embolism (PE) and to compare it with the Celect filter. Methods:This multicenter, randomized, open-label, parallel, positive-controlled, noninferiority trial was conducted in 10 centers across 6 provinces in China from October 2017 to March 2019. Patients who had confirmed lower extremity deep vein thrombosis or PE or who were at risk of PE with a clinical indication for VCF placement due to contraindication to or failure of anticoagulant therapy were included in the trial. The sample size for this trial was based on the assumption that the clinical success rate would be 95% and the noninferiority margin would be 10% for both filters. Each patient underwent baseline testing and was randomized using a web-based central system. Any additional interventions or standard treatments patients received along with the VCF placement were recorded. The primary endpoint was the overall clinical success rate, including technical and clinical success of filter placement and retrieval. The secondary endpoint was the safety of filter placement and retrieval, encompassing procedure-related and filter-related complications. Results:A total of 188 patients were included and were divided into two groups: the Octoparms group (n=94) and the Celect group (n=94). Baseline characteristics and demographics were comparable between the two groups (P>0.05). Technical and clinical success rates for filter placement were achieved in 100% (188/188) of patients. The median dwelling time was 12.0 days (range, 4-190 days). Ten VCFs were left in situ as permanent devices. Of the remaining 178 patients, technical success and clinical success rates for filter retrieval were both achieved in 100% of cases (178/178). Clinical success rates were 92.6% (87/94) for the Octoparms group and 96.8% (91/94) for the Celect group, with a difference of -4.2% (hazard ratio 2.441, 95% confidence interval 0.612-9.741; P=0.206). The lower limit was greater than the noninferiority margin of -10%. Eight patients experienced a total of eight procedure-related complications. No filter-related complications, such as migration, deformation, inferior vena cava (IVC) penetration, peripheral organ damage, or IVC stenosis/occlusion, were observed (P>0.05). Conclusions:The Octoparms filter exhibited a high rate of clinical success and a low rate of complications during placement and retrieval, demonstrating noninferiority to the Celect filter.

Use of Spider Filter Embolic Protection Device During Endovascular Revascularization of Acute Thromboembolic Occlusion of Superficial Femoral Artery.

Revascularization for critical limb ischemia using the SpiderFX embolic protection device in the below-the-knee circulation: initial results

Effective Prevention of Massive Periprocedural Embolism During Renal Artery Stenting.

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

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

Distal embolic filter protection during debulking treatment of peripheral artery disease

Drug‐coated Balloon for the Treatment of Small Vessel Disease: 9 Months of Angiographic Results and 12 Months of Clinical Outcomes of the PEPCAD China SVD Study

Clinical Application of Aegisy Vena Caval Filter in Transcatheter Thrombolytic Therapy of Deep Venous Thrombosis of Lower Extremity via Jugular Vein Approach

Modified One-Session Endovascular Treatment for Deep Venous Thrombosis with High Risk of Pulmonary Embolism: Short-term Outcomes

Embolic protection with filtering or occlusion balloons during saphenous vein graft stenting retrieves identical volumes and sizes of particulate debris

New Endovascular Technique to Prevent Distal Embolism for Iliofemoral Occlusive Disease: Reverse Flow Aspiration With Proximal Sheath Blockage

[A Single-Center Retrospective Study on the Intraluminal Implantation of Inferior Vena Cava Filter for the Lower Extremity Trauma Patients with Deep Venous Thrombosis].

Filter-type Protection Device Retrieval Interfered by Deployed Stent during Subclavian Artery Stenosis Treatment: Case Report and Complication Avoidance Recommendation

Superior vena cava filter placement in tumor patients with deep venous thrombosis in upper extremities:a clinical analysis

Bidirectional Pull-Back Technique for Retrieval of Strut-Embedded Cylinder-Shaped Filters in Inferior Vena Cava

Application of retrievable inferior vena cava filter placement in patients with deep venous thrombosis after fracture

Efficacy and Safety of a Novel Vena Cava Filter on Pulmonary Embolism Prophylaxis: a Prospective, Multicenter, Randomized, Parallel, Positive-Controlled, Noninferiority Clinical Trial

Thrombectomy Combined with Endovascular Therapy in Treatment of Deep Venous Thrombosis of Lower Extremities

Single-session protocol with AngioJet Device for treatment of acute deep vein thrombosis

Avoiding Revascularization Strategy Versus Revascularization with Drug-Coated Balloon for the Treatment of Superficial Femoral Artery Occlusive Disease.

Feasibility study of hand-carried ultrasound-guided retrievable inferior vena cava filter placement