Blood clots are extremely complicated to treat. We’ll explore why doctors recommend inferior vena cava (IVC) filters, and why patients with temporary IVC filters report significant, adverse reactions.
Blood clotting helps close wounds. But when clots gather in your bloodstream, they can cause heart attacks, strokes, pulmonary embolisms (PE), deep vein thrombosis (DVT), and other potentially fatal conditions. Anticoagulants break clots apart and reduce your recurrence odds.
Anticoagulants also carry excessive bleeding risks, since they also curb blood clotting. For example, anticoagulants may be fatal for patients prone to heavy or sudden nosebleeds. In such cases where both clots and anticoagulants present an immediate health concern, health professionals might suggest implanting an IVC filter into a person’s inferior vena cava to trap the blood clots.
Types of IVC Filters
There are two types of IVC filters:
- Permanent IVC filter: Filters that stay implanted within the inferior vena cava vein permanently. This device normally goes into elderly patients, or those with a condition that makes the use of anticoagulant medications inadvisable.
- Retrievable or temporary IVC filters: A retrievable device your surgeon should remove as soon as your PE risk lowers.
The idea of the IVC filter is a good one when it works properly. Blood clots can be fatal if they block enough blood circulation, but the filter prevents this from occurring. Despite the safeguards in place, temporary IVC filters come with their own set of obstacles.
Complications of Temporary IVC Filters
Extended IVC filter use is linked to increased device failure risks. In fact, filter removal becomes increasingly difficult the longer it stays implanted. According to one study highlighted in Medscape, 25.8% of 62 IVC filter patients failed to successfully remove them. This, in turn, can lead to harmful side effects:
- Device migration
- Tool fracture
- Inferior vena cava perforation
- Inability to remove device
To reduce complication risks, a study published in the Journal of Vascular Surgery suggests device removal 29-54 days after implantation.
That’s a highly specific number. Doctors discovered this optimal timeframe after the FDA received over 900 IVC filter adverse event reports over a five-year period. In some instances, patients endured prolonged pain because doctors couldn’t identify the discomfort’s source. It wasn’t until patients either saw a specialist or had surgery that they could pinpoint the problem: a detached IVC filter strut.
Families are filing lawsuits against IVC filter manufacturers for allegedly neglecting to warn patients about their associated risks. Plaintiffs also sue for failing to inform health professionals about timely device retrieval. Many patients blame temporary IVC filters for severe pain and even death.
What You Can Do
Adverse side effects from IVC filters affect many families. Medical fees for patients attempting unsuccessful IVC filter removal can be staggering. If you or a loved one suffered dangerous IVC filter complications, you may qualify for compensation. Contact a lawyer to discuss your options for pursuing an IVC filter claim now.
Jared Heath is the author of The Sound in the Silence. In his role as an SEO content and digital marketing strategist, Jared was directly responsible for managing DrugJustice.com's editorial calendar and published articles on this website from 2015 to 2016. He is now pursuing a new career as a chiropractor.