https://www.healthcare.uiowa.edu/familymedicine/fpinfo/Docs/Chest%20Rx%20VTE%20Feb%202016.pdf

Antithrombotic Therapy for VTE Disease: CHEST Guideline and Expert Panel Report

Guidelines summarize and evaluate available evidence with the aim of assisting health professionals in proposing the best management strategies for an individual patient with a given condition. Guidelines and their recommendations should facilitate decision making of health professionals in their daily practice. However, the final decisions concerning an individual patient must be made by the responsible health professional(s) in consultation with the patient and caregiver as appropriate.

/pdf/2019-esc-guidelines-for-the-diagnosis-and-management-of-4aacwvv1mo.pdf

2019 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of acute pulmonary embolism developed in collaboration with the European respiratory society (ERS)

New @ESCardio Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Management of Acute #PulmonaryEmbolism developed in collaboration with @EuroRespSoc now available: #cardiotwitter @erspublicationshttp://bit.ly/2HnrJaj

https://erj.ersjournals.com/content/erj/early/2019/08/29/13993003.01647-2019.full.pdf

2019 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of acute pulmonary embolism developed in collaboration with the European Respiratory Society (ERS) : The Task Force for the diagnosis and management of acute pulmonary embolism of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC)

https://digitalcommons.wustl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=10660&context=open_access_pubs

American Society of Hematology 2020 guidelines for management of venous thromboembolism: treatment of deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism.

https://www.thelancet.com/pdfs/journals/lancet/PIIS0140-6736(16)30514-1.pdf

Deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism.

Importance Although retrievable inferior vena cava filters are frequently used in addition to anticoagulation in patients with acute venous thromboembolism, their benefit-risk ratio is unclear. Objective To evaluate the efficacy and safety of retrievable vena cava filters plus anticoagulation vs anticoagulation alone for preventing pulmonary embolism recurrence in patients presenting with acute pulmonary embolism and a high risk of recurrence. Design, Setting, and Participants Randomized, open-label, blinded end point trial (PREPIC2) with 6-month follow-up conducted from August 2006 to January 2013. Hospitalized patients with acute, symptomatic pulmonary embolism associated with lower-limb vein thrombosis and at least 1 criterion for severity were assigned to retrievable inferior vena cava filter implantation plus anticoagulation (filter group; n = 200) or anticoagulation alone with no filter implantation (control group; n = 199). Initial hospitalization with ambulatory follow-up occurred in 17 French centers. Interventions Full-dose anticoagulation for at least 6 months in all patients. Insertion of a retrievable inferior vena cava filter in patients randomized to the filter group. Filter retrieval was planned at 3 months from placement. Main Outcomes and Measures Primary efficacy outcome was symptomatic recurrent pulmonary embolism at 3 months. Secondary outcomes were recurrent pulmonary embolism at 6 months, symptomatic deep vein thrombosis, major bleeding, death at 3 and 6 months, and filter complications. Results In the filter group, the filter was successfully inserted in 193 patients and was retrieved as planned in 153 of the 164 patients in whom retrieval was attempted. By 3 months, recurrent pulmonary embolism had occurred in 6 patients (3.0%; all fatal) in the filter group and in 3 patients (1.5%; 2 fatal) in the control group (relative risk with filter, 2.00 [95% CI, 0.51-7.89]; P  = .50). Results were similar at 6 months. No difference was observed between the 2 groups regarding the other outcomes. Filter thrombosis occurred in 3 patients. Conclusions and Relevance Among hospitalized patients with severe acute pulmonary embolism, the use of a retrievable inferior vena cava filter plus anticoagulation compared with anticoagulation alone did not reduce the risk of symptomatic recurrent pulmonary embolism at 3 months. These findings do not support the use of this type of filter in patients who can be treated with anticoagulation. Trial Registration clinicaltrials.gov Identifier:NCT00457158

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/articlepdf/2279714/joi150040.pdf

Effect of a retrievable inferior vena cava filter plus anticoagulation vs anticoagulation alone on risk of recurrent pulmonary embolism: a randomized clinical trial.

Christophe Seinturier

Papers

Effect of a retrievable inferior vena cava filter plus anticoagulation vs anticoagulation alone on risk of recurrent pulmonary embolism: a randomized clinical trial.