| IVC | <abbreviation> Inferior vena cava. (05 Mar 2000) |
|---|
| azygos continuation of interrupted ivc | <radiology> IVC interrupted, hepatic portion absent, joins azygos or hemiazygos, hepatic veins empty directly into RA, associated with polysplenia (12 Dec 1998) |
|---|---|
| bird's nest ivc filter | <radiology> Introduced 1982; Cook Inc., Bloomington, IN advantages, low profile: 14.5 Fr introducer sheath, low recurrent PE rates (1.1 - 2.7% by clinical history), low IVC thrombosis rates (2.9 - 5.0% by clinical history), placement in large diameter IVCs (not greater than40mm), free-form configuration does not require centreing in IVC disadvantages: stainless steel: ferromagnetic = magnetic susceptibility artifact, more operator dependent, difficult to place in short IVCs (need about 7cm for proper placement), prolapse of filter wires (? clinical significance) see also: indications (12 Dec 1998) |
| vena-tech ivc filter | <radiology> Introduced as LGM (L.G. Medical, France), 1985; FDA aprroval 1991: Vena-Tech, Evanston, IL, 6-leg conical design with 6 stabilizing side bars, biocompatible metal known as Phynox (cobalt,chromium,iron,nickel,moly) Efficacy, recurrent PE: 2-6%, IVC occlusion: 8-24%, migration: 0-12% Advantages, ease of placement, excellent clot trapping efficiency, low profile, lacks ferromagnetic activity: minimal MRI artifacts Disadvantages, incomplete opening (6-19%): decreases clot-trapping efficiency, increased incidence from IJ approach, decreased with rapid deployment, increased IVC thrombosis rates: 8% initial reports; 22-24% on subsequent reports by ultrasound/MRI: 2-19% clinically symptomatic (12 Dec 1998) |
| simon nitinol ivc filter | <radiology> Introduced 1990; Nitinol Medical Technologies, Woburn, MA. BARD, thermal memory alloy:titanium and nickel;, straightened form at cool temperatures (4-10C), reforms into predetermined filter shape at body temperatures efficacy, recurrent PE: 0 - 4.8%, IVC thrombosis: 7 - 11% (by clinical symptoms), access site thrombosis: 2 - 10% advantages, narrow introducer sheath (9 Fr), largest choice of access: brachial or left CFV approach without difficulty, only mild MRI artifacts disadvantages, IVC thrombosis: symptomatic occlusion rates higher than reported wtih Greenfield or bird's nest filters, caval penetration: 1 - 33%, caudal drop: exact filter location difficult to predict (12 Dec 1998) |
| titanium greenfield ivc filter | <radiology> Advantages: low profile: 14.3 Fr introducer sheath, percutaneous placement, lack of ferromagnetic properties, low recurrent PE rate (3-5%), low IVC thrombosis rate (1-9%), successful placement (97%) disadvantages: maximum caval diameter = 28mm, tilting/leg assymetry, difficult placement from left femoral approach see also: indications (12 Dec 1998) |