ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2025
IVC Filters in Integrated Acute Pulmonary Embolism Management-A Narrative Review.
Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2025. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Acute pulmonary embolism (APE) remains a significant cause of mortality and morbidity despite increasing prophylaxis for deep venous thrombosis (DVT). The IVC filter is a temporary or permanent intravascular device that traps migrating thrombi from their origin in the pelvis or a lower limb into the pulmonary vasculature, thereby preventing significant APE. The current and longstanding indications for placing an IVC filter are in patients with documented lower extremity DVT and acute APE who also have absolute contraindications to anticoagulation or have experienced an acute, hemodynamically unstable APE requiring ventilatory and vasoactive support, with limited cardiovascular reserve. Updated guidelines have led to a significant rise in IVC filter placements for specific therapeutic indications of venous thromboembolism compared to prophylactic use. Meta-analyses show that IVC filter placement is associated with a lower risk of subsequent APE but an increased risk of DVT. However, there appears to be no significant reduction in APE-related mortality and no change in all-cause mortality. Early complications after IVC filter placement typically relate to procedural issues and include bleeding or infection at the venous access site, development of arteriovenous fistulas, accidental arterial puncture, and post-procedural access site hematoma or thrombosis. Additional early complications include IVC filter malposition, incomplete expansion, IVC penetration, or guidewire entrapment. Delayed complications may involve DVT below the filter, IVC occlusion due to the filter, IVC filter migration, fracture of one of the IVC filter components, IVC rupture, or IVC thrombosis. Retrieval of IVC filters by simple, advanced, or open techniques should be considered after weighing the risk-to-benefit for the individual patient. Deployment of the IVC filter remains an important component of interventional APE management within the narrow indications currently proposed. Current guidance recommends that an untethered temporary IVC filter should be placed and retrieved once the contraindication to anticoagulation is resolved.
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.