Affiliation:
1. Department of Surgery, Carolinas Medical Center, Charlotte, North Carolina
Abstract
The prevention of pulmonary emboli has a long surgical history. Through the development of percutaneous technologies, vena cava filters (VCFs) are now commonly inserted by interventional radiologists. This study reviews our experience with VCFs inserted by general surgeons. We retrospectively reviewed data from our VCF performance improvement database, which is a prospective collection of the VCF experience of the Department of General Surgery from February 1996 to May 2009. Demographics, procedural information, and complications were recorded. Eight hundred fifty-five VCFs were inserted in 853 patients. The mean age was 42.0 years (range, 14 to 90 years). One hundred ninety-seven VCFs were placed in the operating room, and 658 were placed in the intensive care unit. Twelve VCFs were intentionally inserted in a suprarenal position, and four were placed in the superior vena cava. Two patients received both superior vena cava and inferior vena cava filters. Complications included deep vein thrombosis at the insertion site (n = 16), vena cava thrombosis (n = 9), post-VCF pulmonary embolism (n = 2), and a ventricle perforation requiring operative repair (n = 1). No deaths were attributed to the presence of a VCF. Overall insertion success was 99.8 per cent. In two patients, an inferior VCF could not be placed as a result of inferior vena cava occlusion with no safe “landing zone” for deployment. The placement of VCFs is a vital skill in the general surgery armamentarium. Our experience demonstrates that general surgeons can safely insert VCFs with minimal perioperative complications.
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
1. Current World Literature;Current Opinion in Urology;2011-03