Denali, Tulip, and Option Inferior Vena Cava Filter Retrieval: A Single Center Experience
Purpose To compare the technical success of filter retrieval in Denali, Tulip, and Option inferior vena cava filters. Materials and Methods A retrospective analysis of Denali, Gunther Tulip, and Option IVC filters was conducted. Retrieval failure rates, fluoroscopy time, sedation time, use of advanc...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Cardiovascular and interventional radiology 2018-04, Vol.41 (4), p.572-577 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Purpose
To compare the technical success of filter retrieval in Denali, Tulip, and Option inferior vena cava filters.
Materials and Methods
A retrospective analysis of Denali, Gunther Tulip, and Option IVC filters was conducted. Retrieval failure rates, fluoroscopy time, sedation time, use of advanced retrieval techniques, and filter-related complications that led to retrieval failure were recorded.
Results
There were 107 Denali, 43 Option, and 39 Tulip filters deployed and removed with average dwell times of 93.5, 86.0, and 131 days, respectively. Retrieval failure rates were 0.9% for Denali, 11.6% for Option, and 5.1% for Tulip filters (Denali vs. Option
p
= 0.018; Denali vs. Tulip
p
= 0.159; Tulip vs. Option
p
= 0.045). Median fluoroscopy time for filter retrieval was 3.2 min for the Denali filter, 6.75 min for the Option filter, and 4.95 min for the Tulip filter (Denali vs. Option
p
|
---|---|
ISSN: | 0174-1551 1432-086X |
DOI: | 10.1007/s00270-017-1866-z |