Background & Objectives: DVT and PE are called venous thromboemboltic diseases are associated with 300,000 to 600,000 hospitalizations and as many as 50,000 deaths per year. Anticoagulation remains to be the comer stone treatment of venous thromboembolism whereas caval filters should be reserved for patients in whom heparin therapy is contraindicated, failed, or complicated leading to its withdrawal. Thus the indications of caval filters can be classified as follows: (1) Accepted (absolute) inactivation, (2) Relative indications, (3) Debatable indications. Methodology: the study was done on 15 retrospective and 20 prospective patients. Results: Original dose behind the DVT was previous surgery (9 cases), malignancy (8 cases), stroke (5 cases), hypercoagulable state (5 cases), SLE (1 case), iatrogenic (1 case), RA (1 case) and others (3 cases). Site of DVT was mostly iliofemoral (24 cases), but there were also femuro-popliteal (6 cases), cuff (3 cases), caval (1 case) and pelvic (1 case).2 cases of venatech had incomplete opening and 1 case of titanium Greenfield filter showed asymmetry. Caval occlusion occurred in 3 cases, vena DVT in 3 cases and post filter PE in 1 case. No mortality related to the filter occurred 6 mortality occurred due to the underlying disease. Conclusion: Caval filters provide protection from PE. They are safe, effective, with low morbidity and mortality, yet filters are not without complications, thus the indication of filter placement should always be kept clear.