Recent study examines the occurrence of IVC filter perforation, as the rising number of injury reports cause major concern in the medical community.

The study examined the Gunther Tulip and Celect retrievable inferior vena cava (IVC) filters, and found that IVC filter perforation may be much more common than initially believed.

IVC filters are small metal cage like devices, which are directly implanted in the body’s inferior vena cava.

This device is meant to trap and resolve blood clots forming in the pelvis or legs, preventing them from traveling to the heart or lungs.

These devices are often prescribed to patients who cannot use anticoagulant treatment, with patients being able to choose between retrievable and permanent models.

Patients, however, have been reporting major IVC filter complications in association with the retrievable models, including IVC filter perforation and migration.

Overview of IVC Filter Perforation Study

There have been numerous studies conducted observing these problems, leading to several FDA warnings.

One particular study was published in April 2012, and was conducted to assess the incidence rate, magnitude, and impact of IVC filter perforation.

From July 2007 to May 2009, scientists observed patients who had the Gunther Tulip (23 patients) and Celect (27 patients) IVC filters implanted; they had also analyzed follow up abdominal CT scans.

Even though these CT scans were performed for medical purposes unrelated to the IVC filters, the diagnostic images showed several IVC filter complications.

Among the complications seen, scientists saw IVC filter perforation through the vena cava wall, the device was tilted, or vena cava tissue damage.

According to the results of the study, IVC filter perforation had been observed in 43 out of 50 (86%) of patients soon after the devices were implanted.

However CT images collected 71 days after IVC filter implantation showed more severe degree of IVC filter perforation.

The study indicates IVC filter removal was attempted in 12 out of 50 (24%) cases, with the majority of the cases being successful.

From the results, researchers concluded IVC filter perforation severity may be linked to how long the device is left inside the patient.

Researchers stated further research is needed, and that medical community should pay close attention to IVC filter complications mentioned on all follow up image studies.

The FDA first warned the public against IVC filter perforation and other complications in 2010, with the agency receiving 921 reports of adverse IVC filter injury reports from 2005 to 2010.

In a later warning in 2014, the FDA recommended retrievable IVC filters to be removed between the 29th and 54th day after the blood clot is resolved.

Even though these injuries can be potentially deadly for patients, manufacturing companies allegedly failed to warn the public against them. Potential claimants can contact a specialized lawyer, to determine eligibility for an IVC filter lawsuit.