Late complication from a retrievable inferior vena cava filter with associated caval, aortic, and duodenal perforation: a case report.

Vascular Surgery and Organ Transplant Unit-Department of Surgery, Transplantation and Advanced Technologies, University Hospital of Catania, Catania, Italy.
Journal of Vascular Surgery (Impact Factor: 2.98). 07/2008; 48(1):223-5. DOI: 10.1016/j.jvs.2008.02.002
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Inferior vena cava filters are an excellent therapeutic method for those patients in whom anticoagulant therapy is contraindicated or ineffective. However, filter placement is associated with a high rate of serious complications (>30%), with death occurring in 3.7% of patients. The most common complication is an asymptomatic inferior vena cava penetration and perforation. In some rare circumstances, however, therapeutic intervention may be required because of perforation of adjacent organs. We report a clinical case of a patient with simultaneous caval, duodenal, and aortic perforation resulting from penetration of inferior vena cava filter hooks. A brief review of the literature discusses presenting symptoms and treatment of such rare complications.

  • Source
    Annales De Chirurgie Vasculaire. 01/2009; 8(12):8-8.
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Pulmonary embolism remains a serious challenge for health care. Anticoagulation is considered the first line of treatment; however, in patients with anticoagulation failure or contraindication, inferior vena cava filter placement has been widely performed for the prevention of pulmonary embolism. This study is a retrospective review of King Abdulaziz University Hospital two years experience (2008-2009). Nineteen patients who had venous thromboembolic manifestations were subjected to inferior vena cava filter insertion. The main reasons for inferior vena cava filter insertion were the occurrence of venous thromboembolism on top of anticoagulants, and bleeding resulted from heparin induced thrombocytopenia. All of the patients were presented with one or more risk factors and co-morbidities among malignancies were the most common (52.6%). Insertion was successful for all cases, except one patient who had pre-existing massive inferior vena cava thrombosis. No complications were recorded during filter insertion or on the short term, after filter insertion. Medical indications for inferior vena cava filters in our hospital are not different from what was cited in the literature. Although, each individual patient had multiple risk factors and co-morbidities, nevertheless our patients had no complications related to inferior vena cava filter insertion, which denotes that inferior vena cava filters can be inserted properly and safely.
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Perforation of an inferior vena cava filter by one the filter device hooks is a recognized possible complication of this device. We describe a case of surgical excision of a permanent inferior vena cava filter associated with multiple perforations of surrounding structures by each of the 6 hooks of the device. Structures affected include the third lumbar vertebral body, transverse mesocolon, the infrarenal aorta, the duodenum, and the psoas muscle. A thorough understanding of the filter design and adequate preoperative imaging were vital in planning the safe surgical excision of this device.
    Annals of Vascular Surgery 09/2013; 28(1). · 1.03 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

Available from
Jun 5, 2014