Gene/Protein Disease Symptom Drug Enzyme Compound
Pivot Concepts:   Target Concepts:
Query: UMLS:C0034065 (pulmonary embolism)
 14,979 document(s) hit in 31,850,051 MEDLINE articles (0.00 seconds)

In 10 patients with thromboembolic disease 1 Gunther filter and 9 LGM filters were inserted. Indications for filter placement were: pulmonary hypertension caused by recurrent pulmonary embolism in 3 cases; planned surgery in 2 patients with pulmonary embolism and deep venous thrombosis; recurrent pulmonary embolism despite of anticoagulant treatment in 2 cases, previously performed thrombo-endarterectomy in 1 case; contraindications for anticoagulant treatment in 1 case and complications of anticoagulant therapy also in 1 case. No serious complications after filter placement were observed.
 ...
PMID:[Indications for prophylactic vena cava filters introduced subcutaneously in patients with thromboembolic disease--preliminary report]. 758 Oct 62

Efficiency and tolerance of the Vena Tech-LGM filter were assessed in 142 patients prospectively studied during a 2-6-year follow-up period. No patients were lost to follow-up, and 137 (91.3%) scheduled control examinations were performed. Fifty-three patients died of causes unrelated to thromboembolic disease. Pulmonary embolism was suspected in five surviving patients (3.5%). Sixteen retractions (18.4%), 16 intracaval migrations (18.4%), and one tilt were observed. Filter patency studied at Doppler ultrasonography, with or without phlebocavography, gave the following results according to the Kaplan-Meier actuarial method: 92% patency after 2 years of follow-up, 80% after 4 years, and 70% after 6 years. Vena Tech-LGM filter obstruction was related to retraction (P < 10(-6)) or distal migration (P < .004). Occurrence of trophic disease in the lower limbs during the follow-up period was related to the initial level of deep venous thrombosis (P = .03) and had no relation to the patency of the filter. The filter was effective in preventing pulmonary embolism, with 70% demonstrating long-term patency, and no deleterious effects were imputed to obstructions observed during follow-up.
 ...
PMID:Vena Tech-LGM filter: long-term results of a prospective study. 835 62

The authors report their experience with 30 caval filters placed throughout 3 years, and compare it with the data from the literature. In 8 patients (26.5%) Gunther filters were used, in 16 cases (53.5%) Filcard filters (4 DF-01 and 12 DF-04) and finally the last 6 patients (20%) were treated with LGM filters. In 18 cases (60%) the filters were positioned through right common femoral vein, whereas in the remaining 12 patients (40%) they were placed through the right internal jugular vein. Early complications were 1 mispositioning (3.3%) with a LGM filter, 2 incomplete opening (6.6%) of Filcard DF-01 filters, 3 significant tiltings (10%) with Filcard DF-04 filters. One patient (3.3%) died one week after the placement of a Gunther filter. The radiologic follow-up, which included controls with conventional radiology, US, cavography, MR and CT revealed no later complications. All the filters exhibited both advantages and disadvantages. Although all the filters commonly in use are effective to prevent pulmonary embolism, further experience is necessary to find out the "ideal" filter.
 ...
PMID:[Comparison of Gunther, Filcard and LGM definitive caval filters. Our experience]. 849 71

In the case of 53 years old woman LGM filter was inserted over renal veins. Indications for those procedures were: vena cava thrombosis in distal part of vena cava what not allowed to place filter below renal veins, malignancy, planned surgery, proximal deep vein thrombosis and past history of pulmonary embolism. Indications for suprarenal placement of vena cava filters and results of such as procedure were discussed.
 ...
PMID:[Implantation of a LGM suprarenal vena cava filter--case report]. 852 May 62

Case of recurrent, clinically acute massive pulmonary embolism treated with rtPA (administered 0.6 mg/kg, during 10 minutes simultaneously with heparin) is presented. Minimal clinical improvement was observed after mentioned procedure. Good clinical response was achieved after LGM filter insertion into vena cava inferior. Clinical course was complicated by Dressler-like syndrome successfully treated with steroids. Problems of massive pulmonary embolism, vena cava filter prophylaxis and pericardial complication of pulmonary embolism are discussed.
 ...
PMID:[Prophylactic use of the LGM filter in a patient with a recurrent clinically acute massive pulmonary embolism complicated by pericarditis--case report]. 852 May 63

Surgical intervention in fulminant pulmonary embolism (PE) is still associated with an overall 30% fatal outcome which increases to about 60% when cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is necessary. Despite unfavorable conditions like hemodynamic instability, failed lysis or CPR, the surgical strategy might have a certain impact on the patient's outcome since 30-40% of the surgical mortality is related to persistent right heart failure and early thromboembolic recurrence. From 1/88 to 8/94 a total of 25 patients (15 females, 10 men, mean age 57 [25-78]) years underwent emergency pulmonary embolectomy with the use of the heart-lung machine. Seventeen patients were operated upon between 1988 and 1992. A standard approach by central pulmonary artery incision with extraction of adjacent pulmonary emboli using forceps, suction of Fogarty catheters was used. Six of these patients (35%) died, with four out of six operated upon under CPR. Since 1993 we have used a modified surgical strategy in eight patients. Five patients (63%) were operated on after or under CPR. In these cases, left and right pulmonary arteries were incised peripherally and all segmental arteries were desobliterated selectively using small suction devices. Thereafter the right atrium was opened and inspected. After removal of the inferior caval vein cannula all inferior body blood was taken with cardiotomy suction while both legs and the abdomen were massaged centripetally to mobilize additional fresh thrombotic material. In three cases up to 50 cm long thrombi could be delivered. All patients have survived to date with two patients receiving a LGM caval filter placed percutaneously after bilateral postoperative phlebography had revealed ongoing thrombotic disease. We conclude that selective desobliteration of every segmental pulmonary artery in combination with simultaneous clearance of major body veins from additional thrombotic material will probably lower surgical mortality in these critically ill patients.
 ...
PMID:Modified surgical concept for fulminant pulmonary embolism. 856

Caval filters have proved essential to the progress being made in the prevention of recurrent pulmonary embolism. A prospective multicenter study was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and possible complications relating to the LGM Vena-Tech percutaneous caval filter, which has been used in Europe since 1989. A total of 222 patients who had undergone LGM Vena-Tech filter placement between September 1989 and December 1991 were included in this study. Two hundred twenty caval filters were positioned via the percutaneous route: 154 of them via the jugular or subclavian vein and 66 via the femoral vein. Two filters could not be implanted. The in-hospital mortality rate was 1.7% (four patients), which included one patient who died of intraoperative recurrent pulmonary embolism. Mean follow-up was 15 months. Forty-one patients died during follow-up (actuarial survival 65.4% +/- 6% at 30 months). There were five cases of recurrent pulmonary embolism (cumulative freedom from pulmonary embolism 93.2% +/- 3.8% at 30 months). Ten patients had thrombosis of the inferior vena cava (actuarial caval patency 94% +/- 3.6% at 30 months). Eight filters (3.6%) migrated over distances that were less than the height of one vertebra. Shifting did not lead to any cases of thrombosis or recurrent pulmonary embolism. Ten filters tilted between 15 and 25 degrees in relation to the inferior vena cava axis. Recurrent pulmonary embolism never occurred concurrently with filter tilting. The LGM Vena-Tech caval filter ensures satisfactory prevention of pulmonary embolism with a low rate of complications. However, because its long-term fate is not known, its use should be restricted to cases in which heparin treatment has failed or is contraindicated.
 ...
PMID:The LGM Vena-Tech caval filter: results of a multicenter study. 868 16

Inferior vena cava (IVC) filter thrombosis has not been described as a clinical entity. Thirty patients with IVC percutaneous filter thrombosis were assessed by cavography, computed tomographic (CT) scan and/or duplex ultrasonography. All patients had proximal venous thrombosis when the filter was placed, and the indication for filter placement was a contraindication to anticoagulant therapy in eight patients (27%). Filter thrombosis occurred within 6 months following filter placement in 15 patients (early filter thrombosis group). Among these patients, 10 were not treated with oral anticoagulant, and none of the other five received adjusted anticoagulation. No patients with late filter thrombosis received anticoagulant at the time of the diagnosis. Early filter thrombosis was mainly associated with LGM filters (12 of the 15 cases). Occlusion was revealed by recurrent venous thrombosis in 18 cases. A thrombus above the filter and pulmonary embolism was found in 10 patients (33%). Thrombolytic therapy failed in 5 out of 7 cases, and all but two patients were treated with anticoagulant therapy. In conclusion, early filter thrombosis appears to be due to intracaval extension of deep vein thrombosis, and this emphasizes the need for appropriate anticoagulation. In the case of temporary contraindication to anticoagulation at the time of the filter placement, anticoagulant should be reassessed later.
 ...
PMID:Symptomatic inferior vena cava filter thrombosis: clinical study of 30 consecutive cases. 890 59

Screening and prophylaxis of the population at risk is the most correct approach to thromboembolic disease. Caval filters play a major role in the prevention of pulmonary embolism, but their use remains widely controversial, even if they are an alternative or additional method to medical therapy and not antithetical to it. July, 1990, to September, 1995, seventy-seven permanent vena cava filters (59 LGM, 13 Filcard and 5 titanium-Greenfield), 22 short-duration temporary vena cava filters (11 LGT, 6 Filcard, 3 Filcard-Emanuelli and 2 Lysofilter) and 10 mid-duration temporary vena cava filters (Tempofilter) were inserted in 109 patients (55 men and 54 women) aged 17-88 years. An inferior vena cavogram was always made before filter insertion to "map" the inferior vena cava and its tributaries (renal veins) and to assess caval size. This is a mandatory step to exclude or confirm the presence of endocaval thrombi. Sixty-eight filters were inserted percutaneously via a right internal transjugular approach, 40 via a common transfemoral approach (34 right and 6 left) using the same route as inferior cavography and digital pneumoangiography. One temporary filter was inserted via a right transhumeral approach. Sixty-three patients (57.8%) (44 with a permanent filter, 14 with a temporary filter and 5 with a Tempofilter) had medical diseases, 7 patients (6.4%) (4 with a permanent filter, one with a temporary filter and 2 with a Tempofilter) had surgical conditions; 10 patients (9.2%) (7 with a permanent filter and 3 with a Tempofilter) were surgical-orthopedic patients. Twenty-seven patients (24.8%) (22 with a permanent and 5 with a temporary filter) had cancer. Two patients (1.8%) with a temporary filter were breast feeding. All the patients had deep venous thrombosis of the lower limbs, including the inferior vena cava and the right renal vein in two patients. A proximal floating thrombus and a pulmonary thromboembolism was diagnosed in 41 (37.6%) and 34 (31.2%) cases, respectively. The temporary filters remained in situ 1-4 days and the Tempofilters 3-5 weeks. A pelvic hematoma developed (because of heparin?) after the insertion of a temporary filter and a Tempofilter branch detached and migrated into a lower branch of the left pulmonary artery were reported as immediate and short-term consequences. There were no early or late consequences for the patients. An axillary hemorrhage was observed in the site of previous surgery, during fibrinolysis with a Lysofilter, as well as the incomplete opening of a titanium-Greenfield filter and of two permanent LGM filters, partly trapped within endocaval thrombi. No further consequences to the patients due to permanent filters were observed, nor any case of symptomatic pulmonary thromboembolism, in patients with permanent or temporary filters. With reference to the relative literature and to their own experience, the Authors propose a detailed and rational synthesis of the diagnostic-instrumental approach protocol to thromboembolic disease.
 ...
PMID:[Criteria for utilization and indications for use of permanent and short- and medium term temporary endocaval filters. Personal experience and review of the literature]. 904 46

In the Department of Medicine at the Institute of Tuberculosis and Lung Diseases 50 LGM inferior vena cava filters have been inserted since 1993. Indications for filters placement were as follows: recurrent pulmonary embolism (PE) despite anticoagulation-16 patients (pts), severe bleeding complications of thrombolytic or anticoagulant therapy-9 pts, contraindications for thrombolytic and/or anticoagulant treatment-3 pts, massive PE-6 pts, chronic thromboembolic-major vessel pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH)-18 pts, extensive deep vein thrombosis of lower limbs or vena cava inferior in patients with urgent indications for surgery-10 pts. In every patient diagnostic procedures were performed after 1, 3, 6, 12, 24 and 36 months of follow-up period. Only one non-fatal episode of recurrent PE was documented. Other complications were rare and insignificant. The LGM inferior vena cava filters are effective and safe in such selectively chosen group of patients.
 ...
PMID:[LGM inferior vena cava filters--follow up 50 patients]. 918 82


1 2 Next >>