Purpose: Inferior vena cava filter fracture (FF) may cause life-threatening complications, including cardiac tamponade, although the actual prevalence remains unclear. Therefore, we investigated the incidence of FF.
Materials and methods: Data on fracture incidence with filter brands, filter positions [suprarenal (SR) vs. infrarenal (IR)], and follow-up durations were collected from the databases of eight hospitals.
Results: Of 532 patients, Günther Tulip (GT), Trap/OptEase (TE/OE), ALN and VenaTech (VT) were implanted in 345, 147, 38 and 2 patients, respectively. Of these, filter retrieval was attempted in 110 (21.7%) patients and was successful in 106 (96.4%). Of the remaining 426 patients, FFs were observed in two (0.7%) of 270 GT filters and 19 (14.1%) of 135 TE/OE filters. Fragment embolization occurred in one patient with a GT filter (50.0%) and three with a TE/OE filter (15.8%) with a total follow-up interval of 718.0 ± 1019.4 days. FF occurred more frequently in TE/OE than in GT filters (p < 0.001). Kaplan-Meier estimates showed significantly higher fracture-free rates for GT than TE/OE (p < 0.001) and IR-TE/OE than SR-TE/OE (p < 0.05).
Conclusions: TE/OE filters are not suitable for permanent implantation due to the relatively early and high fracture rates.
Keywords: Deep vein thrombosis; Fracture; Inferior vena cava filter; Migration; Pulmonary embolism.