ArticleJournal of thrombosis and thrombolysis2017
Implementation of an institutional protocol to improve inferior vena cava utilization and outcomes.
Article in Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Ibero-American Society of Interventionism (SIDI) and the Spanish Society of Vascular and Interventional Radiology (SERVEI) Standard of Practice (SOP) for the Management of Inferior Vena Cava Filters in the Treatment of Acute Venous Thromboembolism.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Article
- Effect of a dedicated inferior vena cava filter retrieval program on retrieval rates and number of patients lost to follow-up.Diagnostic and interventional radiology (Ankara, Turkey) · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To evaluate the impact of an institutional protocol on patterns of use and outcomes of inferior vena cava filters (IVCF). Following a multidisciplinary effort, an institutional protocol involving dedicated follow-up of patients receiving IVCF and a physician education program regarding IVCF utilization, was established. We prospectively collected data of patients who received IVCF during 2015-2016, following protocol implementation (POST group). For comparison, we reviewed records of patients who received IVCF during 2009-2014, before implementation of the institutional protocol (PRE group). In the PRE and POST groups, 76 and 38 IVCF per year were inserted respectively, with an overall decrease of 50%. IVCF were more likely to be placed for therapeutic rather than prophylactic indications in the POST compared to the PRE group (P = 0.003). Follow-up rates at our coagulation clinic were significantly higher in the POST than the PRE group (100 vs. 22.9%, P < 0.0001), as were rates of attempted retrieval: 60.5% (23/38) vs. 16.7% (76/455), P < 0.0001. Failed retrieval occurred at similar rates: 15.8% (12/76) vs. 18.2% (4/22), P = 0.75. There was a trend towards a lower thrombotic complication rate in the POST than the PRE group: 2.6 vs. 11.2%, P = 0.16. Implementation of an institutional protocol significantly decreased the use of IVCF and increased the retrieval rate. Such intervention could potentially lead to lower rates of IVCF-related complications in the future.
Indexed as
Identifiers
28589302What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.