Download PDF
Semin intervent Radiol 2016; 33(02): 093-100
DOI: 10.1055/s-0036-1583208
Thieme Medical Publishers 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.

Evidence-Based Evaluation of Inferior Vena Cava Filter Complications Based on Filter Type

Steven E. Deso
1   Division of Vascular and Interventional Radiology, Stanford University Medical Center, Stanford, California
,
Ibrahim A. Idakoji
1   Division of Vascular and Interventional Radiology, Stanford University Medical Center, Stanford, California
,
William T. Kuo
1   Division of Vascular and Interventional Radiology, Stanford University Medical Center, Stanford, California
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
10 May 2016 (online)

Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Many inferior vena cava (IVC) filter types, along with their specific risks and complications, are not recognized. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the various FDA-approved IVC filter types to determine device-specific risks, as a way to help identify patients who may benefit from ongoing follow-up versus prompt filter retrieval. An evidence-based electronic search (FDA Premarket Notification, MEDLINE, FDA MAUDE) was performed to identify all IVC filter types and device-specific complications from 1980 to 2014. Twenty-three IVC filter types (14 retrievable, 9 permanent) were identified. The devices were categorized as follows: conical (n = 14), conical with umbrella (n = 1), conical with cylindrical element (n = 2), biconical with cylindrical element (n = 2), helical (n = 1), spiral (n = 1), and complex (n = 1). Purely conical filters were associated with the highest reported risks of penetration (90–100%). Filters with cylindrical or umbrella elements were associated with the highest reported risk of IVC thrombosis (30–50%). Conical Bard filters were associated with the highest reported risks of fracture (40%). The various FDA-approved IVC filter types were evaluated for device-specific complications based on best current evidence. This information can be used to guide and optimize clinical management in patients with indwelling IVC filters.

Keywords

IVC filters - nonthrombotic complications - interventional radiology
 

  • References

  • 1 Duszak Jr R, Parker L, Levin DC, Rao VM. Placement and removal of inferior vena cava filters: national trends in the Medicare population. J Am Coll Radiol 2011; 8 (7) 483-489
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Stein PD, Kayali F, Olson RE. Twenty-one-year trends in the use of inferior vena cava filters. Arch Intern Med 2004; 164 (14) 1541-1545
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Smouse BJ. Is market growth of vena cava filters justified?. Endovasc Today 2010; 74-77
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Food and Drug Administration. Removing Retrievable Inferior Vena Cava Filters: Initial Communication. Published August 9, 2010. Available at: http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/Safety/AlertsandNotices/ucm221676.htm . Accessed July 30, 2015
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Food and Drug Administration. 510(K) Premarket Notification Database. Published 2014. Available at: http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfpmn/pmn.cfm . Accessed January 1, 2015
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Caplin DM, Nikolic B, Kalva SP, Ganguli S, Saad WE, Zuckerman DA ; Society of Interventional Radiology Standards of Practice Committee. Quality improvement guidelines for the performance of inferior vena cava filter placement for the prevention of pulmonary embolism. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2011; 22 (11) 1499-1506
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Durack JC, Westphalen AC, Kekulawela S , et al. Perforation of the IVC: rule rather than exception after longer indwelling times for the Günther Tulip and Celect retrievable filters. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 2012; 35 (2) 299-308
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Food and Drug Administration. MAUDE - Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience Database. Published 2014. Available at: http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfmaude/search.cfm . Accessed January 1, 2015
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Bakal CW, Silberzweig JE. Vascular and Interventional Radiology: Principles and Practice. New York, NY: Thieme; 2011
    Google Scholar
  • 10 Tam MD, Spain J, Lieber M, Geisinger M, Sands MJ, Wang W. Fracture and distant migration of the Bard Recovery filter: a retrospective review of 363 implantations for potentially life-threatening complications. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2012; 23 (2) 199-205.e1
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Nicholson W, Nicholson WJ, Tolerico P , et al. Prevalence of fracture and fragment embolization of Bard retrievable vena cava filters and clinical implications including cardiac perforation and tamponade. Arch Intern Med 2010; 170 (20) 1827-1831
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Hull JE, Robertson SW. Bard Recovery filter: evaluation and management of vena cava limb perforation, fracture, and migration. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2009; 20 (1) 52-60
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Vijay K, Hughes JA, Burdette AS , et al. Fractured Bard Recovery, G2, and G2 express inferior vena cava filters: incidence, clinical consequences, and outcomes of removal attempts. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2012; 23 (2) 188-194
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Kalva SP, Athanasoulis CA, Fan CM , et al. “Recovery” vena cava filter: experience in 96 patients. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 2006; 29 (4) 559-564
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Binkert CA, Drooz AT, Caridi JG , et al. Technical success and safety of retrieval of the G2 filter in a prospective, multicenter study. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2009; 20 (11) 1449-1453
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 An T, Moon E, Bullen J , et al. Prevalence and clinical consequences of fracture and fragment migration of the Bard G2 filter: imaging and clinical follow-up in 684 implantations. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2014; 25 (6) 941-948
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Poletti PA, Becker CD, Prina L , et al. Long-term results of the Simon nitinol inferior vena cava filter. Eur Radiol 1998; 8 (2) 289-294
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 McCowan TC, Ferris EJ, Carver DK, Molpus WM. Complications of the nitinol vena caval filter. J Vasc Interv Radiol 1992; 3 (2) 401-408
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Sano M, Unno N, Yamamoto N, Tanaka H, Konno H. Frequent fracture of TrapEase inferior vena cava filters: a long-term follow-up assessment. Arch Intern Med 2012; 172 (2) 189-191
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Cantwell CP, Pennypacker J, Singh H, Scorza LB, Waybill PN, Lynch FC. Comparison of the recovery and G2 filter as retrievable inferior vena cava filters. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2009; 20 (9) 1193-1199
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Binkert CA, Sasadeusz K, Stavropoulos SW. Retrievability of the recovery vena cava filter after dwell times longer than 180 days. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2006; 17 (2, Pt 1): 299-302
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Charles HW, Black M, Kovacs S , et al. G2 inferior vena cava filter: retrievability and safety. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2009; 20 (8) 1046-1051
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Lynch FC, Kekulawela S. Removal of the G2 filter: differences between implantation times greater and less than 180 days. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2009; 20 (9) 1200-1209
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Marquess JS, Burke CT, Beecham AH , et al. Factors associated with failed retrieval of the Günther Tulip inferior vena cava filter. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2008; 19 (9) 1321-1327
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Smouse HB, Rosenthal D, Thuong VH , et al. Long-term retrieval success rate profile for the Günther Tulip vena cava filter. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2009; 20 (7) 871-877 , quiz 878
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Wicky S, Doenz F, Meuwly J-Y, Portier F, Schnyder P, Denys A. Clinical experience with retrievable Günther Tulip vena cava filters. J Endovasc Ther 2003; 10 (5) 994-1000
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Xiao L, Huang DS, Shen J, Tong JJ. Introducer curving technique for the prevention of tilting of transfemoral Günther Tulip inferior vena cava filter. Korean J Radiol 2012; 13 (4) 483-491
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Greenfield LJ, Peyton R, Crute S, Barnes R. Greenfield vena caval filter experience: late results in 156 patients. Arch Surg 1981; 116 (11) 1451-1456
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Messmer JM, Greenfield LJ. Greenfield caval filters: long-term radiographic follow-up study. Radiology 1985; 156 (3) 613-618
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Kinney TB, Rose SC, Weingarten KE, Valji K, Oglevie SB, Roberts AC. IVC filter tilt and asymmetry: comparison of the over-the-wire stainless-steel and titanium Greenfield IVC filters. J Vasc Interv Radiol 1997; 8 (6) 1029-1037
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Johnson SP, Raiken DP, Grebe PJ, Diffin DC, Leyendecker JR. Single institution prospective evaluation of the over-the-wire Greenfield vena caval filter. J Vasc Interv Radiol 1998; 9 (5) 766-773
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Sweeney TJ, Van Aman ME. Deployment problems with the titanium Greenfield filter. J Vasc Interv Radiol 1993; 4 (5) 691-694
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Wittenberg G, Kueppers V, Tschammler A, Scheppach W, Kenn W, Hahn D. Long-term results of vena cava filters: experiences with the LGM and the Titanium Greenfield devices. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 1998; 21 (3) 225-229
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Nicholson AA, Ettles DF, Paddon AJ, Dyet JF. Long-term follow-up of the bird's nest IVC filter. Clin Radiol 1999; 54 (11) 759-764
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 McLoney ED, Krishnasamy VP, Castle JC, Yang X, Guy G. Complications of Celect, Günther tulip, and Greenfield inferior vena cava filters on CT follow-up: a single-institution experience. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2013; 24 (11) 1723-1729
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Hoffer EK, Mueller RJ, Luciano MR, Lee NN, Michaels AT, Gemery JM. Safety and efficacy of the Gunther Tulip retrievable vena cava filter: midterm outcomes. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 2013; 36 (4) 998-1005
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Olorunsola OG, Kohi MP, Fidelman N , et al. Caval penetration by retrievable inferior vena cava filters: a retrospective comparison of Option and Günther Tulip filters. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2013; 24 (4) 566-571
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Zhou D, Spain J, Moon E, Mclennan G, Sands MJ, Wang W. Retrospective review of 120 Celect inferior vena cava filter retrievals: experience at a single institution. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2012; 23 (12) 1557-1563
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Sangwaiya MJ, Marentis TC, Walker TG, Stecker M, Wicky ST, Kalva SP. Safety and effectiveness of the celect inferior vena cava filter: preliminary results. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2009; 20 (9) 1188-1192
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Greenfield LJ, Cho KJ, Proctor M , et al. Results of a multicenter study of the modified hook-titanium Greenfield filter. J Vasc Surg 1991; 14 (3) 253-257
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Ferris EJ, McCowan TC, Carver DK, McFarland DR. Percutaneous inferior vena caval filters: follow-up of seven designs in 320 patients. Radiology 1993; 188 (3) 851-856
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 42 Greenfield LJ, Cho KJ, Pais SO, Van Aman M. Preliminary clinical experience with the titanium Greenfield vena caval filter. Arch Surg 1989; 124 (6) 657-659
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 43 Hoppe H, Nutting CW, Smouse HR , et al. Günther Tulip filter retrievability multicenter study including CT follow-up: final report. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2006; 17 (6) 1017-1023
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 44 Millward SF, Peterson RA, Moher D , et al. LGM (Vena Tech) vena caval filter: experience at a single institution. J Vasc Interv Radiol 1994; 5 (2) 351-356
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 45 Crochet DP, Brunel P, Trogrlic S, Grossetëte R, Auget J-L, Dary C. Long-term follow-up of Vena Tech-LGM filter: predictors and frequency of caval occlusion. J Vasc Interv Radiol 1999; 10 (2, Pt 1): 137-142
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 46 Corriere MA, Sauve KJ, Ayerdi J , et al. Vena cava filters and inferior vena cava thrombosis. J Vasc Surg 2007; 45 (4) 789-794
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 47 Simon M, Athanasoulis CA, Kim D , et al. Simon nitinol inferior vena cava filter: initial clinical experience. Work in progress. Radiology 1989; 172 (1) 99-103
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 48 Kim D, Edelman RR, Margolin CJ , et al. The Simon nitinol filter: evaluation by MR and ultrasound. Angiology 1992; 43 (7) 541-548
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 49 Grassi CJ, Matsumoto AH, Teitelbaum GP. Vena caval occlusion after Simon nitinol filter placement: identification with MR imaging in patients with malignancy. J Vasc Interv Radiol 1992; 3 (3) 535-539
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 50 Food and Drug Administration. Removing Retrievable Inferior Vena Cava Filters: FDA Safety Communication. Published 2014. Available at: http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/Safety/AlertsandNotices/ucm396377.htm . Accessed January 1, 2015
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 51 Morales JP, Li X, Irony TZ, Ibrahim NG, Moynahan M, Cavanaugh Jr KJ. Decision analysis of retrievable inferior vena cava filters in patients without pulmonary embolism. J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord 2013; 1 (4) 376-384
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 52 Angel LF, Tapson V, Galgon RE, Restrepo MI, Kaufman J. Systematic review of the use of retrievable inferior vena cava filters. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2011; 22 (11) 1522-1530.e3
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 53 Meyer A, Schönleben F, Heinz M, Lang W. Perforated inferior vena cava filters as the cause of unclear abdominal pain. Ann Vasc Surg 2013; 27 (3) 354.e9-354.e12
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 54 Pellerin O, di Primio M, Sanchez O, Meyer G, Sapoval M. Successful retrieval of 29 ALN inferior vena cava filters at a mean of 25.6 months after placement. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2013; 24 (2) 284-288
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 55 Pellerin O, Barral FG, Lions C, Novelli L, Beregi JP, Sapoval M. Early and late retrieval of the ALN removable vena cava filter: results from a multicenter study. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 2008; 31 (5) 889-896
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 56 Kuo WT, Robertson SW, Odegaard JI, Hofmann LV. Complex retrieval of fractured, embedded, and penetrating inferior vena cava filters: a prospective study with histologic and electron microscopic analysis. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2013; 24 (5) 622-630.e1 , quiz 631
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 57 Mismetti P, Rivron-Guillot K, Quenet S , et al. A prospective long-term study of 220 patients with a retrievable vena cava filter for secondary prevention of venous thromboembolism. Chest 2007; 131 (1) 223-229
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 58 Imberti D, Bianchi M, Farina A, Siragusa S, Silingardi M, Ageno W. Clinical experience with retrievable vena cava filters: results of a prospective observational multicenter study. J Thromb Haemost 2005; 3 (7) 1370-1375
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 59 Caronno R, Piffaretti G, Tozzi M , et al. Mid-term experience with the ALN retrievable inferior vena cava filter. European journal of vascular and endovascular surgery: the official journal of the European Society for Vascular Surgery 2006; 32 (5) 596-9
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 60 Zhu X, Tam MDBS, Bartholomew J, Newman JS, Sands MJ, Wang W. Retrievability and device-related complications of the G2 filter: a retrospective study of 139 filter retrievals. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2011; 22 (6) 806-812
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 61 Oliva VL, Perreault P, Giroux M-F, Bouchard L, Therasse E, Soulez G. Recovery G2 inferior vena cava filter: technical success and safety of retrieval. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2008; 19 (6) 884-889
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 62 Kuo WT, Robertson SW. Bard Denali IVC filter fracture and embolization resulting in cardiac tamponade: a device failure analysis. Journal of vascular and interventional radiology. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2014; ; In press
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 63 Stavropoulos SW, Sing RF, Elmasri F , et al; DENALI Trial Investigators. The DENALI Trial: an interim analysis of a prospective, multicenter study of the Denali retrievable inferior vena cava filter. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2014; 25 (10) 1497-1505 , 1505.e1
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 64 Awh MH, Taylor FC, Lu CT. Spontaneous fracture of a Vena-Tech inferior vena caval filter. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1991; 157 (1) 177-178
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 65 Ricco J-B, Dubreuil F, Reynaud P , et al. The LGM Vena-Tech caval filter: results of a multicenter study. Ann Vasc Surg 1995; 9 (Suppl): S89-S100
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 66 Murphy TP, Dorfman GS, Yedlicka JW ,et al. LGM vena cava filter: objective evaluation of early results. J Vasc Interv Radiol 1991; 2 (1) 107-115
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 67 Le Blanche AF, Benazzouz A, Reynaud P , et al. The VenaTech LP permanent caval filter: effectiveness and safety in the prevention of pulmonary embolism–a European multicenter study. Journal of vascular and interventional radiology. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2008; 19 (4) 509-515
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 68 Taheri SA, Kulaylat MN, Johnson E, Hoover E. A complication of the Greenfield filter: fracture and distal migration of two struts—a case report. J Vasc Surg 1992; 16 (1) 96-99
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 69 Carabasi III RA, Moritz MJ, Jarrell BE. Complications encountered with the use of the Greenfield filter. Am J Surg 1987; 154 (2) 163-168
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 70 Wingerd M, Bernhard VM, Maddison F, Towne JB. Comparison of caval filters in the management of venous thromboembolism. Arch Surg 1978; 113 (11) 1264-1271
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 71 Greenfield LJ, Michna BA. Twelve-year clinical experience with the Greenfield vena caval filter. Surgery 1988; 104 (4) 706-712
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 72 Greenfield LJ, Proctor MC. Twenty-year clinical experience with the Greenfield filter. Cardiovasc Surg 1995; 3 (2) 199-205
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 73 Greenfield LJ, Proctor MC. The percutaneous greenfield filter: outcomes and practice patterns. J Vasc Surg 2000; 32 (5) 888-893
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 74 Cho KJ, Greenfield LJ, Proctor MC , et al. Evaluation of a new percutaneous stainless steel Greenfield filter. J Vasc Interv Radiol 1997; 8 (2) 181-187
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 75 Greenfield LJ, Proctor MC, Cho KJ , et al. Extended evaluation of the titanium Greenfield vena caval filter. J Vasc Surg 1994; 20 (3) 458-464 , discussion 464–465
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 76 Wang W, Zhou D, Obuchowski N, Spain J, An T, Moon E. Fracture and migration of Celect inferior vena cava filters: a retrospective review of 741 consecutive implantations. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2013; 24 (11) 1719-1722
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 77 Lyon SM, Riojas GE, Uberoi R , et al. Short- and long-term retrievability of the Celect vena cava filter: results from a multi-institutional registry. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2009; 20 (11) 1441-1448
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 78 Roehm Jr JO, Johnsrude IS, Barth MH, Gianturco C. The bird's nest inferior vena cava filter: progress report. Radiology 1988; 168 (3) 745-749
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 79 Ziegler JW, Dietrich GJ, Cohen SA, Sterling K, Duncan J, Samotowka M. PROOF trial: protection from pulmonary embolism with the OptEase filter. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2008; 19 (8) 1165-1170
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 80 Oliva VL, Szatmari F, Giroux M-F, Flemming BK, Cohen SA, Soulez G. The Jonas study: evaluation of the retrievability of the Cordis OptEase inferior vena cava filter. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2005; 16 (11) 1439-1445, quiz 1445
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 81 Rosenthal D, Swischuk JL, Cohen SA, Wellons ED. OptEase retrievable inferior vena cava filter: initial multicenter experience. Vascular 2005; 13 (5) 286-289
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 82 Kalva SP, Wicky S, Waltman AC, Athanasoulis CA. TrapEase vena cava filter: experience in 751 patients. J Endovasc Ther 2006; 13 (3) 365-372
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 83 Liu WC, Do YS, Choo SW , et al. The mid-term efficacy and safety of a permanent nitinol IVC filter(TrapEase). Korean J Radiol 2005; 6 (2) 110-116
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 84 Rousseau H, Perreault P, Otal P , et al. The 6-F nitinol TrapEase inferior vena cava filter: results of a prospective multicenter trial. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2001; 12 (3) 299-304
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 85 Kalva SP, Marentis TC, Yeddula K, Somarouthu B, Wicky S, Stecker MS. Long-term safety and effectiveness of the “OptEase” vena cava filter. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 2011; 34 (2) 331-337
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 86 Usoh F, Hingorani A, Ascher E , et al. Prospective randomized study comparing the clinical outcomes between inferior vena cava Greenfield and TrapEase filters. J Vasc Surg 2010; 52 (2) 394-399
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 87 Johnson MS, Nemcek Jr AA, Benenati JF , et al. The safety and effectiveness of the retrievable option inferior vena cava filter: a United States prospective multicenter clinical study. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2010; 21 (8) 1173-1184
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 88 Smouse HB, Mendes R, Bosiers M, Van Ha TG, Crabtree T, Investigators R ; RETRIEVE Investigators. The RETRIEVE trial: safety and effectiveness of the retrievable crux vena cava filter. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2013; 24 (5) 609-621
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar