McBride, Joseph J.

ObjectivesEvaluate the success rate of retrievable inferior vena cava filter (IVC) removal in a tertiary care practice.BackgroundRetrievable IVC filters became readily available in the United States following Food and Drug Administration approval in 2003, and their use has increased dramatically. They represent an attractive option for patients with contraindications to anticoagulation who may only need short‐term protection against pulmonary embolism.MethodsAll patients who had undergone placement of a retrievable IVC filter at Mayo Clinic between 2003 and 2005 were retrospectively reviewed to evaluate our initial experience with retrievable inferior vena cava filters at a large tertiary care center. Results: During a three‐year‐period of time, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN placed 892 IVC filters of which 460 were retrievable. Of the 460 retrievable filters placed (249 Günther Tulip®, 207 Recovery®, and 4 OptEase®), retrieval was attempted in 223 (48.5%). Of 223 initial attempts, 196 (87.9%) were initially successful and 27 (12.1%) were unsuccessful. Of the 27 unsuccessful initial retrieval attempts, 23 (85.2%) were because of the presence of significant thrombus within the filter and 4 (14.8%) were because of tilting and strut perforation. Of the 23 filters containing significant thrombus, 9 (39.1%) were later retrieved after a period of anticoagulation and resolution of the thrombus.ConclusionsRetrievable IVC filters can be removed with a high degree of success. Approximately one in ten retrievable IVC filter removal attempts may fail initially, usually because of significant thrombus within the filter. This does not preclude possible removal at a later date. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Purpose: To determine the factors that affect mean absorbed dose and fluoroscopic times during renal artery stent placement. Materials and Methods: After institutional review board approval, the HI-IQ database was queried for patients undergoing renal artery stent placement only from January 2007 to June 2010. Procedures that were performed as part of other procedures such as iliac artery stents were excluded. The HI-IQ data included fluoroscopy time ( f) and radiation dose (mGy). Demographic, medical history, procedural details, and advanced preprocedural renal artery stent imaging were obtained. Variables (number of stents, average body mass index , number of stents placed per year and number of years’ service of an interventional physician, pre-procedural imaging, and use of embolic protection device) were analyzed using a t test after log transformation and testing for variance with an F test. Results: A total of 134 patients (75 males, 70.6 ± 10.5 years old) underwent the placement of 177 renal artery stents (unilateral [n = 95], average stent per patient = 1.3). Mean fluoroscopy time was 15.6 minutes and mean absorbed dose to the patient was 1729 mGy. The average fluoroscopic time and absorbed dose was significantly higher with bilateral stent placement compared to unilateral placement (13.8 vs 19.7 minutes, P = .002; 1803 vs 2380 mGy, P = .03). The average fluoroscopic time was significantly higher in patients undergoing abdominal aortogram prior to renal artery selection and stent placement. Conclusion: The placement of more than 1 stent with an abdominal angiogram prior to renal artery stent placement results in increased fluoroscopic time and mean absorbed dose.