Vena cava filters: A synopsis of complications and related topics
Journal of Vascular Access, ISSN: 1129-7298, Vol: 9, Issue: 2, Page: 102-110
2008
- 33Citations
- 2Usage
- 17Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations33
- Citation Indexes33
- 33
- CrossRef27
- Usage2
- Abstract Views2
- Captures17
- Readers17
- 17
Review Description
Deep venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolism constitute common preventable causes of morbidity and mortality. The incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) continues to increase. Standard anticoagulation therapy may reduce the risk of fatal PE by 75% and that of recurrent VTE by over 90%. For patients who are not candidates for anticoagulation, a vena cava filter (VCF) may be beneficial. Despite a good overall safety record, significant complications related to VCF are occasionally seen. This review discusses both procedural and non-procedural complications associated with VCF placement and use. We will also discuss VCF use in the settings of pregnancy, malignancy, and the clinical need for more than one filter. © Wichtig Editore, 2008.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=49649111926&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/112972980800900204; https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/112972980800900204; https://crin.sluhn.org/ndos_ap/215; https://crin.sluhn.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1214&context=ndos_ap; https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/112972980800900204
SAGE Publications
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know