Vascular specialist international · 2014
Current Status of the Retrieval Rate of Retrievable Vena Cava Filters in a Tertiary Referral Center in Korea.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Park Hyeongmin, Han Ahram, Choi Chanjoong, Min Sang-Il, Ha Jongwon, Jung In Mok, Lee Taeseung, Kim Hyo-Cheol, Jae Hwan Joon, Min Seung-Kee
Аннотация
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to review the daily practice of inferior vena cava filters (IVCFs) in a tertiary referral center in Korea and to reveal the retrieval rate and the methods for improving it.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Through the electronic medical record system, a retrospective review was performed on 115 consecutive patients who underwent placement of retrievable IVCFs between February 2000 and January 2011 in Seoul National University Hospital.
RESULTS: IVCF placement was done in 115 cases (113 patients). There were 68 men (59.1%), and the mean age was 58.5±15.5 years (range, 10-96 years). The affiliated departments were Vascular Surgery (57 cases, 49.6%), and Internal Medicine (20 cases, 17.4%). Advanced malignancy was the most commonly associated disease (n=30, 26%). The indications for IVCF placement were categorized; absolute indications in 36 cases (31.3%), relative indications in 78 cases (67.8%), and prophylactic use in 1 case (0.9%). The most common indications were thrombolysis/thrombectomy for iliocaval deep vein thrombosis (DVT) (n=55, 47.8). Of the 115 filters, 68 were retrieved (retrieval rate, 59%). The most common cause of non-retrieval was chronic high risk of venous thromboembolism in 24 patients (51%), followed by residual proximal DVT (n=7, 15%), and negligence by unknown reasons (n=6, 13%).
CONCLUSION: To improve the retrieval rate, the number of follow-up losses to vascular specialists must be decreased, which can be achieved by establishment of a dedicated IVC filter clinic, implementation of a filter registry, and regular education for medical teams and patients along with their families.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Through the electronic medical record system, a retrospective review was performed on 115 consecutive patients who underwent placement of retrievable IVCFs between February 2000 and January 2011 in Seoul National University Hospital.
RESULTS: IVCF placement was done in 115 cases (113 patients). There were 68 men (59.1%), and the mean age was 58.5±15.5 years (range, 10-96 years). The affiliated departments were Vascular Surgery (57 cases, 49.6%), and Internal Medicine (20 cases, 17.4%). Advanced malignancy was the most commonly associated disease (n=30, 26%). The indications for IVCF placement were categorized; absolute indications in 36 cases (31.3%), relative indications in 78 cases (67.8%), and prophylactic use in 1 case (0.9%). The most common indications were thrombolysis/thrombectomy for iliocaval deep vein thrombosis (DVT) (n=55, 47.8). Of the 115 filters, 68 were retrieved (retrieval rate, 59%). The most common cause of non-retrieval was chronic high risk of venous thromboembolism in 24 patients (51%), followed by residual proximal DVT (n=7, 15%), and negligence by unknown reasons (n=6, 13%).
CONCLUSION: To improve the retrieval rate, the number of follow-up losses to vascular specialists must be decreased, which can be achieved by establishment of a dedicated IVC filter clinic, implementation of a filter registry, and regular education for medical teams and patients along with their families.