| Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools. |
DOI: 10.1177/155335060501200303 Optional Vena Cava Filters for Patients with High Thromboembolic Risk: Questions to be AnsweredCarolinas Laparoscopic and Advanced Surgery Program, Carolinas Medical Center, Charlotte, NC; Department of Surgery/MEB 601, 1000 Blythe Boulevard, Charlotte, NC 28203 (ron.sing{at}carolinashealthcare.org).
Department of Surgery, University of Vermont, Burlington, VT.
Carolinas Laparoscopic and Advanced Surgery Program, Carolinas Medical Center, Charlotte, NC
Carolinas Laparoscopic and Advanced Surgery Program, Carolinas Medical Center, Charlotte, NC The use of vena cava filters has increased rapidly over the past few years to more than 140,000 filters inserted worldwide in 2003. Continued improvements in filter design have increased the safety of intravascular caval filtration. Although there are many factors attributed to this increase, the most significant contributing factor has been the development of optional vena cava filters. That is, filters that can be left as a permanent device or can be removed endovascularly at a later date. Three filters are approved for removal in the United States, the Günther Tulip, the OptEase, and the Recovery. Recent reports have demonstrated the safety and feasibility of these devices in appropriate patients, but a number of questions have arisen regarding their use.
Key Words: intravascular caval filtration optional vena cava filters endovascular
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
||||||||||||
