Inferior vena cava thrombosis: a review of current practice.

Inferior vena cava (IVC) thrombosis remains under-recognised as it is often not pursued as a primary diagnosis. The aetiology of IVC thrombosis can be divided into congenital versus acquired, with all aetiological factors found among Virchow's triad of stasis, injury and hypercoagulability. Signs and symptoms are related to aetiology and range from no symptoms to cardiovascular collapse. Painful lower limb swelling combined with lower back pain, pyrexia, dilatation of cutaneous abdominal wall veins and a concurrent rise in inflammatory markers are suggestive of IVC thrombosis. Following initial lower limb venous duplex, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is the optimal non-invasive imaging tool. Aetiology directs treatment, which ranges from anticoagulation and lower limb compression to open surgery, with endovascular therapies increasingly favoured. The objective of this review is to assess current literature on the aetiology, presentation, investigation, treatment, prognosis and other factors pertaining to IVC thrombosis.

Assessment of the quality of care and financial impact of a virtual renal clinic compared with the traditional outpatient service model.

BACKGROUND: Patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) have better outcomes when they have access to specialist nephrology services early in the course of their disease. However, up to 30% of patients with advanced kidney disease face late referral. Virtual clinics represent a potentially innovative mechanism for early assessment of high patient volumes efficiently and cost effectively while maintaining high standards of care. METHODS: A retrospective observational cohort study was completed over a 4-year period from April 2004 to March 2008 at a regional nephrology centre within Northern Ireland. All new patient attendances at the nephrology clinic were identified and those managed via the virtual renal clinic approach were included in this study. A cost comparison of this innovative modality was made with the traditional outpatient service model. RESULTS: There were 427 patients (51.3% female, 48.7% male) managed through the virtual renal clinic. Comorbidities included 180 patients (42.1%) with known CKD and 31 patients (7.3%) with newly identified kidney disease. A total of 118 patients (27.6%) had hypertension while 6 (1.4%) and 57 (13.3%) had type I and II diabetes mellitus (DM) respectively. Referral indications included 211 patients (49.4%) with abnormal renal biochemistry, 35 (8.2%) with proteinuria, 12 (2.8%) with haematuria and 87 patients (20.4%) with a combination of issues. A conservative treatment plan consisting of biochemical surveillance was appropriate for 246 patients (57.6%) while medication review was completed for 113 patients (26.5%) and surgical referral was indicated in 20 patients (4.7%). The virtual renal clinic provided a minimum cost saving of £111.56 per patient attendance compared with traditional outpatient care resulting in 23.3% of patient referrals being managed by the virtual clinic approach in 2009. CONCLUSION: Delayed referral to a renal specialist adversely affects patient outcomes. This study suggests that the implementation of a virtual renal clinic for non-complex renal pathologies can offer a cost-effective, rapid referral mechanism for patient assessment combined with readily available specialist advice.