ArticleFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2024
Case Report: Endoluminal removal of a conical retrievable superior vena cava filter with a retraction hook attached to the wall.
Article in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We report the case of a 22-year-old male who underwent endoluminal surgery and was implanted an Option Elite filter in the superior vena cava (SVC) while the filter retraction hook was attached to the vessel wall. The patient requested to remove the filter after 155 days. Preoperative ultrasonography and CT examination revealed that the filter retraction hook was very likely to penetrate the SVC wall and its tip was very close to the right pulmonary artery. The SVC was not obstructed, and no thrombus was observed in either upper limb. After the filter retrieval device (ZYLOX, China) failed to capture the filter hook, we introduced a pigtail catheter with its tip partly removed and a loach guidewire, used a modified loop-snare technique to cut the proliferative tissues and free the hook, and finally removed the filter successfully by direct suspension of the guidewire. During this procedure, the patient experienced discomfort, such as chest pain and palpitations, but these symptoms disappeared when procedure completed. Repeated multiangle angiography revealed no contrast medium extravasation, no complications such as pericardial tamponade, pleural effusion, SVC haematoma formation, right pulmonary artery dissecting aneurysm, or intramural haematoma. We initially presented the modified loop-snare technique used to remove a conical superior vena cava filter (SVCF), so this method can be considered a practical and novel auxiliary technique for successful filter retrieval.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.