During my last "major" (on heart by-pass machine) surgery, they installed a filter to stop any blood clots from traveling to my heart. Immediately after the surgery, the doc told me I'd need to come in and have it removed after a year. The year passed and everytime I asked about it, it was brushed aside as no big deal. I finally demanded a sit-down conference to find out why I was getting conflicting info ... the doc who installed it, said take it out after a year, but the subsequent docs pretty much ignored the whole situation. I asked for a definitive explanation and was told it has not created any problems and is safer to leave in place. They told me the process of removal can many times lead to complications ... a perforated artery would be the most common.
NOW there's a big stink going on about the manufacturer knowing there were flaws in the filters from the beginning and there has been an on-going cover-up. Now hundreds have failed and caused serious injuries and there have been 27 deaths.
I've been reading up on them and have found this old report (2011) so who knows what the numbers are now? (I've had mine for 6 years)
The FDA warned that IVC filters are for short-term use in patients at risk for pulmonary embolism and implanting doctors are to retrieve the devices once the patient’s risk subsides. The agency is concerned that doctors are not retrieving IVC filters intended for short-term placement, exposing patients to further health risks caused by fractured devices.
According to the FDA’s report, since 2005 the agency had received 921 adverse event reports involving IVC filters; 328 involved device migration, 146 involved detachments of device components and embolizations, 70 involved perforation of the IVC, and 56 involved filter breaking. According to the Interventional Radiology Clinic of Washington University, an IVC implant device carries a risk of damage to blood vessels, bruising, bleeding at the puncture site, filter lodging, injury of a nearby organ, and detachment, which could cause injury to the heart or lungs and even death. The FDA said it had not issued a safety warning until Dr. William Nicholson’s research brought to light serious health issues with IVC filters, despite receiving an alarming number of adverse event reports.
The majority of adverse event reports received by the FDA involved retrievable IVC filters that were not removed by implanting physicians and clinicians. The agency warns that attending physicians, including interventional radiologists, interventional cardiologists, bariatric surgeons, primary care physicians, vascular surgeons and emergency physicians should follow up with IVC filter recipients as part of providing ongoing care and should refer patients for device removal if the clinical risk of pulmonary embolism has subsided.
So crap ... which way do I go? Risk injury/death REMOVING the device or risk injury/death by NOT removing it? FUCK!
Here's the most recent with video:
http://www.nbcnews.com/health/health...l-flaw-n384536
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by Buckrub
