Publication:

Clinical comparison of two optional vena cava filters

Date

Date

Date
2007
Journal Article
Published version
cris.lastimport.scopus2025-06-05T03:41:52Z
cris.lastimport.wos2025-07-23T01:31:07Z
cris.virtual.orcidhttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-7560-7574
cris.virtualsource.orcid43f230c7-c92b-4aa5-a19d-986bd0936165
dc.contributor.institutionUniversity of Zurich
dc.date.accessioned2020-11-23T16:03:11Z
dc.date.available2020-11-23T16:03:11Z
dc.date.issued2007-04
dc.description.abstract

PURPOSE: To compare the clinical safety and efficiency of two optional inferior vena cava (IVC) filters.

MATERIAL AND METHODS: Ninety-three consecutive Günther Tulip filters (92 patients) were compared with 83 consecutive OptEase filters (80 patients). Filters were placed at the same institution in patients with high-risk multiple trauma or those undergoing neurosurgery with contraindications to primary prophylaxis (70 patients in the Günther Tulip group and 44 in the OptEase group) and in patients with venous thromboembolism and contraindications to anticoagulation (22 patients in the Günther Tulip group and 36 in the OptEase group). The filters were placed in an angiography suite. Catheter vena cavography was performed before filter placement and intended retrieval. Permanent filters were followed-up with duplex ultrasonography and conventional radiography.

RESULTS: All filters were inserted infrarenally without any complications. Fluoroscopy times for placement and retrieval were longer for the Günther Tulip group than the OptEase group. The mean dwelling time was 11 days (range, 3-27 days) for the Günther Tulip filters and 13.8 days (range, 1-34 days) for the OptEase filters. No symptomatic pulmonary emboli (PE) occurred in patients with intended temporary filtration while the devices were in place. Forty-six of the 93 Günther Tulip filters (49%) and 58 of the 83 OptEase filters (70%) were removed. Two Günther Tulip filters could not be retrieved for technical reasons. The mean follow-up for the permanent Günther Tulip (n = 19) and OptEase (n = 8) filters was 41 and 7 months, respectively. One patient from each group had late caval thrombosis. There were no cases of filter migration or disintegration.

CONCLUSION: Both optional IVC filters are safe and seem to prevent symptomatic PE. On the basis of the fluoroscopy times, the OptEase filters appear to be more operator-friendly. Late filter-associated complications are rare with these filter designs.

dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.jvir.2007.02.007
dc.identifier.issn1051-0443
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-34047263415
dc.identifier.urihttps://www.zora.uzh.ch/handle/20.500.14742/174286
dc.identifier.wos000246008400005
dc.language.isoeng
dc.subject.ddc610 Medicine & health
dc.title

Clinical comparison of two optional vena cava filters

dc.typearticle
dcterms.accessRightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccess
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.journaltitleJournal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.number4
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.originalpublishernameElsevier
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.pageend511
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.pagestart505
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.pmid17446541
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.volume18
dspace.entity.typePublicationen
uzh.contributor.affiliationUniversity Hospital Zurich, Institut fur Diagnostische Radiologie
uzh.contributor.affiliationUniversity of Zurich
uzh.contributor.affiliationUniversity Hospital Zurich, Institut fur Diagnostische Radiologie
uzh.contributor.affiliationUniversity of Zurich
uzh.contributor.affiliationUniversity Hospital Zurich, Institut fur Diagnostische Radiologie
uzh.contributor.authorKeller, Isabella S
uzh.contributor.authorMeier, Christoph
uzh.contributor.authorPfiffner, Roger
uzh.contributor.authorKeller, Emanuela
uzh.contributor.authorPfammatter, Thomas
uzh.contributor.correspondenceNo
uzh.contributor.correspondenceNo
uzh.contributor.correspondenceNo
uzh.contributor.correspondenceNo
uzh.contributor.correspondenceYes
uzh.document.availabilitynone
uzh.eprint.datestamp2020-11-23 16:03:11
uzh.eprint.lastmod2025-07-23 02:07:12
uzh.eprint.statusChange2020-11-23 16:03:11
uzh.harvester.ethYes
uzh.harvester.nbNo
uzh.identifier.doi10.5167/uzh-192295
uzh.jdb.eprintsId27902
uzh.oastatus.unpaywallclosed
uzh.oastatus.zoraClosed
uzh.publication.citationKeller, Isabella S; Meier, Christoph; Pfiffner, Roger; Keller, Emanuela; Pfammatter, Thomas (2007). Clinical comparison of two optional vena cava filters. Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology, 18(4):505-511.
uzh.publication.originalworkoriginal
uzh.publication.publishedStatusfinal
uzh.relatedUrl.urlhttps://www.zora.uzh.ch/id/eprint/11172/
uzh.scopus.impact31
uzh.scopus.subjectsRadiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging
uzh.scopus.subjectsCardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
uzh.workflow.doajuzh.workflow.doaj.false
uzh.workflow.eprintid192295
uzh.workflow.fulltextStatusrestricted
uzh.workflow.revisions48
uzh.workflow.rightsCheckoffen
uzh.workflow.sourcePubMed:PMID:17446541
uzh.workflow.statusarchive
uzh.wos.impact29
Files

Original bundle

Name:
ZORA_192295.pdf
Size:
93.08 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Downloadable by admins only
Publication available in collections: