ArticleCureus2026
Failed Retrieval of an Inferior Vena Cava Filter.
Article in Cureus, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Inferior vena cava (IVC) filters are devices used to lower the risk of critical pulmonary embolisms in patients with current deep vein thrombosis (DVT) or a high risk of developing such. These devices are used especially when there are contraindications to anticoagulants or when conservative therapy has failed. Typically, IVC filters are temporary and can be retrieved upon improvement in the patient's clotting status. This case presents a 75-year-old female whose IVC filter retrieval failed. Once cleared by both cardiology and orthopedics, the decision was made to retrieve the IVC filter. First attempts at retrieval proved unsuccessful as the IVC filter was tilted approximately 30 degrees. Several attempts were first made to retrieve the filter using the snare-and-sheath technique to grab the hook at the top of the filter. The clinicians then also attempted to use endoscopic graspers, followed by several different laparoscopic graspers to aid in more precise gripping of either the hook or the tines of the filter. However, the grip was insufficient when attempting to retract it into the sheath. An additional venogram was then taken, which demonstrated further tilting of the IVC filter. The hook of the IVC filter appeared to reside in the origin of the right renal vein. After multiple failed attempts, a decision was made to leave the filter in place to avoid potential complications. Retrieving IVC filters can present with difficulty. The development of advanced retrieval techniques, aside from the snare-and-sheath standard method, has helped increase the removal success rates, and complication rates remain low. Clinicians should exercise caution when IVC filters are difficult to retrieve, as this can lead to severe complications. Despite utilizing these techniques in complex scenarios, further study is needed to define and standardize the removal steps.
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.