Inferior Vena Cava Filter Placement During Pregnancy: an Adjuvant Option When Medical Therapy Fails

The authors present a case of a 27-year-old multiparous woman, with multiple thrombophilia, whose pregnancy was complicated with deep venous thrombosis requiring placement of a vena cava filter. At 15th week of gestation, following an acute deep venous thrombosis of the right inferior limb, anticoagulant therapy with low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) was instituted without improvement in her clinical status. Subsequently, at 18 weeks of pregnancy, LMWH was switched to warfarin. At 30th week of gestation, the maintenance of high thrombotic risk was the premise for placement of an inferior vena cava filter for prophylaxis of pulmonary embolism during childbirth and postpartum. There were no complications and a vaginal delivery was accomplished at 37 weeks of gestation. Venal placement of inferior vena cava filters is an attractive option as prophylaxis for pulmonary embolism during pregnancy.

Contraceptive Choices Pre and Post Pregnancy in Adolescence

STUDY OBJECTIVE: The main aim of this study is to evaluate the impact of adolescent pregnancy in the future contraceptive choices. A secondary aim is to verify whether these choices differ from those made after an abortion. DESIGN: Retrospective study. SETTING:Adolescent Unit of a tertiary care center. PARTICIPANTS:212 pregnant teenagers. INTERVENTIONS: Medical records review. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:Intended pregnancy rate and contraceptive methods used before and after pregnancy. For contraceptive choices after pregnancy we considered: Group 1 - teenagers who continued their pregnancy to delivery (n = 106) and Group 2 - the same number of adolescents who chose to terminate their pregnancy. RESULTS: The intended pregnancy rate was 14.2%. Prior to a pregnancy continued to delivery, the most widely used contraceptive method was the male condom (50.9%), followed by oral combined contraceptives (28.3%); 18.9% of adolescents were not using any contraceptive method. After pregnancy, contraceptive implant was chosen by 70.8% of subjects (P < .001) and the oral combined contraceptives remained the second most frequent option (17.9%, P = .058). Comparing these results with Group 2, we found that the outcome of the pregnancy was the main factor in the choices that were made. Thus, after a pregnancy continued to delivery, adolescents prefer the use of LARC [78.4% vs 40.5%, OR: 5,958 - 95% (2.914-12.181), P < .001)], especially contraceptive implants [70.8% vs 38.7%, OR: 4.371 - 95% (2.224-8.591), P < .001], to oral combined contraceptives [17.9% vs 57.5%, OR: 0.118 - 95% CI (0.054-0.258), P < .001]. CONCLUSION:Adolescent pregnancy and its outcome constitute a factor of change in future contraceptive choice.