Injury Risk Rises the Longer IVC Filters Are in Place

A recent study found that the longer IVC filters are in place, the higher risk of death or serious injury. This is an important finding because it makes clear how critical early detection is for better outcomes. What impact will these findings have on future research?

The “what happens when an ivc filter catches a clot” is a question that has been asked before. The answer is that the longer the IVC filter is in place, the higher the risk of injury.

Injury Risk Rises the Longer IVC Filters Are in Place

A medical device designed to prevent blood clots from reaching the heart and lungs may expose patients to potentially deadly injuries such as ruptured blood vessels or organs.

Filters for the inferior vena cava (IVC) are metal cage-like devices implanted in the body’s biggest vein (the inferior vena cava). The extended legs of the device trap blood clots and prevent them from reaching the heart or lungs, where they may be fatal.

However, if the device is kept in patients for longer than required, it might result in a variety of medical issues. Furthermore, the longer the filter is in place, the more difficult and complicated it is to remove the potentially deadly device.

Filters should be removed within two months, according to the FDA.

IVC filters have been associated to dozens of fatalities and approximately 1,000 FDA-reported adverse events.

The device has been documented to migrate from its initial place, occasionally embedding itself in the inferior vena cava, according to patients. According to some tales, the gadget shatters, causing metal shards to float about in the body until they puncture the heart, lungs, or blood vessels.

IVC filters were first authorized by the FDA as a permanent medical device that could be left in place permanently. After receiving hundreds of incident reports in 2010, they advised that the device be removed once it was no longer required for the patient’s health.

Temporary retrievable filters are now available, however there is a narrow window of opportunity between when the device gives life-saving advantages and when it may create life-threatening difficulties. Removable IVC filters should be removed between 29 and 54 days after implantation if the patient is no longer at risk of blood clots, according to the FDA.

However, according to a JAMA Internal Medicine research, the majority of doctors don’t follow up with patients who have this high-risk medical device, resulting in temporary IVC filters becoming permanent. The research discovered that just 8.5 percent of IVC filters were successfully retrieved. Only 24% of patients had any form of retrieval effort, placing many patients at risk of catastrophic medical consequences.

According to one research, the percentage of effective IVC filter retrieval was as low as 8.5 percent.

This medical omission has major health ramifications. Because most retrievable IVC filters aren’t really retrieved, according to a research from Northshore University in Illinois, their complication risk is greater than permanent filters: 8.9% vs 2.9 percent. 

Waiting too long to remove an IVC filter increases the risk of the device breaking, migrating, or perforating an organ or blood artery, as well as the potential that a physician will need to utilize advanced retrieval procedures, or that the filter will not be removed at all.

After seven months, there’s a 40% chance of retrieval failure, according to a study.

For a study published this month, researchers from Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine looked at 762 IVC filter retrieval operations from January 2009 to April 2015. A number of devices were used in the surgeries, but the Celect IVC filter from Cook Medical was the most common.

The longer the device had been implanted, the more likely normal retrieval operations would fail, according to the researchers.


A conventional IVC filter removal technique had a failure rate of 40.9 percent after seven months. According to the researchers, the failure rate only rose after this point.

“Any possible advantage of a device optimized for limited usage may be negated by the greater risk of problems due to poor retrieval rates.”

“Any possible advantage of a device optimized for limited usage may be negated by the greater risk of problems associated with extended or frequently indefinite implantation,” according to the paper.

“These devices were intended to be theoretically retrievable but may be kept in situ,” lead researcher Dr. Kush Desai told tctmd. But no one realized what would happen in the months and years ahead, way beyond their intended use.”

Patients who have worn IVC filters for seven months or more should be referred to facilities with sophisticated retrieval capabilities, according to the researchers. Even then, whether or not to function is contingent on whether and where the gadget has moved. If the filter is in an unusual location, such as near essential organs or blood arteries, removing it may be more dangerous than keeping it in.

Hundreds of people have filed lawsuits because of IVC filter complications.

Hundreds of patients and families have sued manufacturers because of the potentially deadly problems linked with IVC filters. The companies C.R. Bard and Cook Medical are facing the most litigation. According to several claims, the device’s producers were aware of the device’s safety dangers but chose to keep them hidden from the public in order to profit.

In Florida, Pennsylvania, and California, class action lawsuits have been launched against Bard. Members of the class are requesting the creation of a medical monitoring fund to help defray the expenses of continuing safety monitoring for patients who use the gadget.

Cook Medical and C.R. Bard have also been named in multidistrict litigation (MDL) actions in Indiana and Arizona, respectively.

Whether you or a loved one has been hurt by an IVC filter, call us right once to see if you have a case. A lawsuit may help you be paid for medical bills, lost earnings, pain and suffering, and other things.

Watch This Video-

The “ivc filter removal after 10 years” is a case study in which the injury risk increases the longer IVC filters are in place. The case study’s conclusion is that patients should be counseled about the risks of having an IVC filter.

Frequently Asked Questions

What happens if you leave an IVC filter in too long?

A: If you leave an IVC filter in too long, it can cause the tissue around your heart to die and eventually lead to a stroke.

What are the risks of IVC filter?

A: The most common risk of an IVC filter is the possibility that it will be dislodged or lead to blood getting in your lungs. This can cause serious problems such as pneumonia, pulmonary embolism and heart attack.

How long should IVC filters stay in?

A: This really depends on the individual and their specific needs. Your best bet is to ask your doctor or pharmacist for a recommendation

Related Tags

  • how long does an ivc filter stay in place
  • ivc filter guidelines 2020
  • what is an ivc filter
  • ivc filter long-term complications
  • ivc filter contraindications