A Medicare study has found that the use of inferior vena cava filter (IVC filter) for the prevention of pulmonary embolism (PE) increased somewhat between 1999 and 2010, despite questions regarding clinical benefit.
During that period of time, as PE-related hospitalizations rose, so did the proportions of those admitted that were placed with IVC filters.
However, the frequency of PE hospitalizations with filter placement did not increase significantly over the same period among all PE patients.
The study focused on the experiences of 556,658 Medicare beneficiaries over age 65 who were hospitalized with PE.
Certain subgroups saw bigger changes in inferior vena cava filter insertion, including patients over age 85, who had the largest increase in filter placement in 2010, while black participants had the largest drop.
The study authors concluded that mortality associated with PE hospitalizations is generally on the decline, regardless of IVC filter use.
The study also found that the filters are most often used in patients that are not shown to benefit from their use.
According to the researchers, “the vast majority of inferior vena caval filters (91 percent) are inserted in patients with PE in stable condition, and such patients have not been shown to receive a clinically meaningful benefit.”
Conversely, only 27 percent of those who might benefit – those in unstable condition – actually receive the filters.
Experienced Attorney & Legal SaaS CEO
With over 25 years of legal experience, Jessie is an Illinois lawyer, a CPA, and a mother of three. She spent the first decade of her career working as an international tax attorney at Deloitte.
In 2009, Jessie co-founded her own law firm with her husband – which has scaled to over 30 employees since its conception.
In 2016, Jessie founded TruLaw, which allows her to collaborate with attorneys and legal experts across the United States on a daily basis. This hypervaluable network of experts is what enables her to share reliable legal information with her readers!
Here, at TruLaw, we’re committed to helping victims get the justice they deserve.
Alongside our partner law firms, we have successfully collected over $3 Billion in verdicts and settlements on behalf of injured individuals.
Would you like our help?
At TruLaw, we fiercely combat corporations that endanger individuals’ well-being. If you’ve suffered injuries and believe these well-funded entities should be held accountable, we’re here for you.
With TruLaw, you gain access to successful and seasoned lawyers who maximize your chances of success. Our lawyers invest in you—they do not receive a dime until your lawsuit reaches a successful resolution!
Do you believe you’re entitled to compensation?
Use our Instant Case Evaluator to find out in as little as 60 seconds!
Camp Lejeune’s water contamination issue spanned several decades starting in the 1950s. Exposure to these chemicals has been linked to various serious health issues, including cancer, organ diseases, and death.
Research is increasingly suggesting a link between the use of Tylenol during pregnancy and the development of neurodevelopmental disorders, such as autism and ADHD, in infants.
Legal action is being taken against manufacturers of Aqueous Film-Forming Foam (AFFF), a chemical used in fighting fires. The plaintiffs allege that exposure to the foam caused health issues such as cancer, organ damage, and birth and fertility issues.
Here, at TruLaw, we’re committed to helping victims get the justice they deserve.
Alongside our partner law firms, we have successfully collected over $3 Billion in verdicts and settlements on behalf of injured individuals.
Would you like our help?
Weis Market Inc., a Mid-Atlantic food retailer based in Sunbury, Pennsylvania, has recalled its 48-ounce containers of Weis Quality Brownie Moose Tracks Ice Cream because the product may contain traces of egg, an allergen not declared on the ingredient statement label, according to the FDA.
Marlex Pharmaceuticals, Inc., of New Castle, Delaware, has announced a voluntary, consumer-level recall of one lot of Digoxin Tablets USP, 0125mg, as well as one lot of Digoxin Tablets USP, 0.25mg, because the labels of both products have been mixed up, according to the FDA.