Impact of ovarian vein embolization in recurrent varicose veins of the lower extremity.

Background: The treatment success of catheter-based ovarian vein embolization due to peripheral varicose veins and ovarian vein reflux (OVR) should be investigated in this clinical investagtion. Patients and methods: For this study, 95 female patients were identified over a 5-year period (beginning of 2006 to end of 2011) after catheter-based coil (+/- chemical) embolization of the ovarian vein due to peripheral primary or recurrent varicose veins and proven reflux in the ovarian vein. Treatment success was retrospectively assessed in 2014 by means of a structured telephone interview (n=60), clinical examination (n=56), duplex ultrasound (n=56) and magnetic resonance imaging (n=51) in patients who were willing to participate in the study. Results: After an average of 51.9 months, 95.2% of the 60 included patients were diagnosed with recurrent varicose veins by duplex sonography and 88.1% by clinical examination. In 15.2%, a new intervention was required due to clinical symptoms. The median recurrence-free time was 47.0±5.5 months. A significant improvement by therapy was reported for all subjective symptoms in both pelvis and legs. No significant correlation between radiological findings and complaints or between radiological findings and clinical recurrence was found. Conclusions: The medical history of female patients with peripheral varicose veins should obligatorily include the question of symptoms in the pelvis. An appropriate diagnostic should follow in order to prevent a possible overlook of a pelvic leak point. Only then an individually adapted therapy for symptom relief is possible. Catheter-based ovarian vein embolization is one optional safe procedure that leads to significant improvement of subjective symptoms but does not necessarily prevent recurrent varicose veins.

Quantifiable remaining reflux 1 year after treatment of superficial venous incompetence is associated with impaired clinical outcome.

OBJECTIVE: Remaining symptoms after treatment of superficial venous incompetence is a common problem. Duplex ultrasound is often used during follow-up, but does not permit an overall quantification of venous function. We have developed a plethysmographic method using occlusion cuffs for separation of superficial and deep venous reflux. By assessing the superficial component it is possible to quantify a potential suboptimal hemodynamic treatment in patients with superficial venous incompetence. The aim was to examine whether patients with hemodynamically quantifiable remaining reflux after treatment experience impaired clinical outcomes. METHODS: This single-center prospective cohort study evaluated 156 limbs with great saphenous vein incompetence treated with radiofrequency ablation or high ligation and stripping. Duplex ultrasound and strain-gauge plethysmography (SGP) with and without selective superficial occlusion were performed before and one-year after treatment. Time taken (seconds) to reach 50% of the venous volume (T50) was evaluated. A difference in the T50of >5 seconds between postoperative strain-gauge plethysmography with and without superficial occlusion was defined as remaining reflux. The Venous Clinical Severity Score (VCSS) and Aberdeen Varicose Vein Questionnaire (AVVQ) were evaluated and compared between patients with and without remaining reflux. Multivariable logistic regression was used to evaluate risk factors for remaining plethysmographic reflux. RESULTS: In all patients, median (25th, 75th percentile) T50 increased preoperatively from 7 seconds (3, 12 seconds) to 17 seconds (11, 28 seconds) (P < .001) 1 year after treatment. The VCSS and AVVQ were reduced (VCSS, 8.0 [6.0, 10.0] vs 3.0 [1.0, 5.0] [P < .001]; AVVQ, 21.8 [15.8, 32.1] vs 6.4 [2.2, 11.0] [P < .001]). Of the 156 limbs, 87 (56%) demonstrated remaining reflux 1 year after treatment. Patients with remaining plethysmographic reflux displayed higher median (25th, 75th percentile) VCSS (3.0 [2.0, 5.0] vs 2.0 [1.0, 4.0]; P = .012) and AVVQ (7.5 [2.7, 14.9] vs 4.7 [1.6, 9.2]; P = .025). Multivariate logistic regression showed that higher preoperative C in the Clinical Etiology Anatomy Pathophysiology classification (CEAP) (odds ratio [OR], 2.9 [95% confidence interval [CI], 1.34-6.46), age (OR, 1.03; 95% CI, 1.001-1.065), small saphenous vein incompetence (OR, 4.2; 95% CI, 1.30-13.73) and postoperative great saphenous vein reflux below the treated area (OR, 2.16; 95% CI, 1.02-4.56) were significant risk factors for remaining plethysmographic reflux. CONCLUSIONS: A majority of treated limbs showed quantifiable reflux 1 year after intervention and these patients displayed worse patient related outcomes assessed with the VCSS and AVVQ. Remaining plethysmographic reflux was associated with preoperative small saphenous vein incompetence and reflux below the treated area as well as advanced age and higher C in CEAP.

Effectiveness of iliac vein stenting combined with endovenous laser treatment of recurrent varicose veins associated with iliac vein compression.

Background: Iliac vein compression syndrome (IVCS) is an underlying cause of varicose vein (VV) recurrence after venous surgery. However, the management of recurrent varicose veins (RVVs) combined with IVCS has rarely been reported. This study aimed to investigate the outcomes of a one-stop procedure to correct outflow obstruction and superficial reflux for patients with RVVs and IVCS. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted of 102 consecutive patients diagnosed with RVVs. Computed tomography venography (CTV) was performed to confirm IVCS. The cases were divided into 2 groups: the IRVVs group, including patients with RVVs and IVCS (n=48), and the RVVs group, including patients with RVVs only (n=54). The characteristics, vein reflux, and clinical, etiological, anatomical, and pathophysiological (CEAP) distribution were investigated. Then, the IRVVs group patients who underwent endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) (n=39) were divided into a further 2 groups: the EVLA + S group (n=19), who received EVLA and stenting of iliac vein, and the EVLA group (n=20), who received EVLA treatment alone. The great/small saphenous vein (GSV/SSV) trunk occlusion, VV recurrence, visual analogue scale (VAS), and venous clinical severity score (VCSS) were investigated. Results: The prevalence rate of femoral vein reflux was 81.2% in IRVVs group and 50% in RVVs group (P<0.05). In the IRVVs group, 72.9% of patients manifested as CEAP clinical class >3, which was higher than that in RVVs group (48.1%) (P<0.05). The 12-month GSV/SSV occlusion rate in the EVLA + S and EVLA groups were 94.7% and 90.0%, respectively. Totals of 9 patients in EVLA + S group and 6 patients in EVLA group had active venous ulcers, and the ulcer healing time in EVLA + S group was significantly shorter (27.22±7.12 vs. 46.67±9.83 days, P<0.05). The reductions in the VAS and VCSS values between baseline, 1 month, and 12 months in the EVLA + S group were more obvious than those in EVLA group (P<0.05). Conclusions: The one-stop combination treatment of iliac venous stenting and EVLA in patients with RVVs and IVCS is safe and effective and provides prominent symptom relief, improved quality of life, and a more satisfactory ulcer healing than EVLA alone.

Endoglin and Other Angiogenesis Markers in Recurrent Varicose Veins.

BACKGROUND: Surgery on varicose veins (crossectomy and stripping) may lead to recurrence, with clinical and socioeconomic repercussions. The etiopathogenesis of varicose veins has yet to be fully understood. OBJECTIVE: Study the expression of endoglin and other molecules involved in the neovascularisation process in patients suffering from this disease. METHODS: Total of 43 patients that have undergone surgery for varicose veins (24 primary and 19 recurrent). Endoglin and other molecules were identified on the venous wall (proximal -saphenofemoral junction- and distal), via real-time RT-PCR, and in serum, via ELISA: endoglin (Eng), vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF-A), its receptors 1 and 2 (VEGFR1 or FLT1), (VEGFR2 or FLK), and the hypoxia-inducible factor (HIF-1A). All the patients signed a consent form. RESULTS: The recurrent group recorded a higher expression of Eng, VEGF-A, VEGFR1, and VEGFR2 at the level of proximal venous wall compared to the primary group. HIF-1A did not record any differences. As regards the determination of the distal venous wall, no markers recorded differences between the groups. Among the serum determinations, only sFLT1 recorded a significant drop among the patients with recurrent varicose veins. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with recurrent varicose veins record a higher expression of endoglin and other markers of angiogenesis in proximal veins. Endoglin in the blood (sEng) serves no apparent purpose in recurrent varicose veins.

The influence of non-thrombotic iliac vein stenosis on clinical course and recurrence of primary varicose veins.

INTRODUCTION: To investigate the influence of iliac vein stenosis on clinical course and recurrence of primary varicose veins after surgeryMaterials and methods: Thirty-three patients with primary varicose veins qualified for great saphenous vein stripping were analysed. The stenosis of common (CIV) and external (EIV) iliac vein was measured by IVUS and defined in three categories as minimal lumen area <90 mm2 for CIV and <75 mm2 for EIV, minimal lumen diameter <10 mm for CIV and <7.5 mm for EIV and area reduction >50%. The patients were assessed clinically and by Duplex ultrasound 48 to 72 months after the procedure. Any recurrence, the recurrence in the saphenofemoral junction (SFJ), change in Venous Clinical Severity Score ( VCSS), were analyzed in relation to the stenosis in the CIV and EIV. RESULTS: The follow-up was completed in 27 patients. Any recurrence and the recurrence in the SFJ were observed in 70% and 18.5% of patients, respectively. There were no statistically significant differences in any recurrence, the recurrence in the SFJ and VCSS in relation to CIV and EIV stenosis in any category. CONCLUSIONS: Iliac vein stenosis does not influence the clinical course and recurrence of primary varicose veins after surgery.

Cranial Tributary Ablation of the Saphenofemoral Junction during Laser Crossectomy of the Great Saphenous Vein.

Objectives: Anterior accessory saphenous vein (AASV) insufficiency is one of the most common causes of recurrent varicose veins after endovenous thermal ablation (EVTA) for great saphenous vein (GSV) insufficiency. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of cranial tributary ablation (CTA) during laser crossectomy (LC) of the GSV. Methods: We reviewed 182 limbs in 171 patients undergoing EVTA aiming for LC with a 1470-nm diode laser. In the CTA group, either the superficial circumflex iliac vein or the superficial epigastric vein was directly ablated during LC. The result was compared between the CTA (n=63) and control (n=119) groups using follow-up duplex ultrasound performed for 6 months after EVTA. Results: Initial success rate of CTA was 69%. The AASV occlusion rate (90% vs. 63%, p<0.001) and the flush GSV occlusion rate (68% vs. 30%, p<0.001) at 6 months were better in the CTA group. No major adverse events were observed. Conclusion: CTA during LC of the GSV is a safe and effective approach to achieve better flush or AASV occlusion rates after EVTA. It is occasionally technically demanding but can be a feasible option. Further investigation is needed to confirm our results.

Residual incompetent tributaries after varicose vein surgery increased the need for reintervention after 8 years.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine whether residual incompetent tributaries after varicose vein surgery affected the reintervention rate after longer follow-up. METHODS: The study is a retrospective review of data from a cohort of a previous randomized controlled study comparing surgery with and without preoperative duplex ultrasound, with follow-up after 2 months, 2 years, and 5 to 9 years clinically and with duplex ultrasound. The cohort was subdivided according to the duplex ultrasound findings 2 months after surgery: no venous incompetence, residual incompetent tributaries only, truncal incompetence, and combined truncal and tributary incompetence. Reintervention rates were compared between groups. RESULTS: There were 280 patients (326 legs) who attended follow-up 2 months postoperatively and 164 patients (190 legs) after a median of 8 years (5-9 years). Another 53 patients (62 legs) were interviewed by telephone or had been reoperated on earlier during follow-up; thus, information was available for 217 patients (252 legs). Of the 252 legs, 56 (22%) were reoperated on during follow-up. In the subgroup with no venous incompetence at all 2 months postoperatively, 4 of 74 legs (5%) were reoperated on; and in the group with residual incompetent tributaries without truncal incompetence, 16 of 56 legs (29%) were reoperated on (P = .000). There was no significant difference in reintervention rate of the group with incompetent tributaries only compared with those with truncal incompetence without incompetent tributaries (12/42 legs [29%]; P = 1) or with combined incompetence of truncal vein and tributaries (22/64 legs [34%]; P = .495). The presence of perforating vein incompetence at 2 months postoperatively did not significantly alter the rate of reoperations (P = .159). In legs that had not been reoperated on, more incompetent veins could be seen progressively. In the group without any incompetent veins postoperatively, 37% still had normal findings at 8 years. CONCLUSIONS: Residual incompetent tributaries after treatment of varicose veins will increase the reintervention rate in the long term, as much as leaving a trunk vein untreated. Patients should be informed about the increased risk of reintervention if not all incompetent veins are targeted.

Treatment of incompetent perforators in recurrent venous insufficiency with adhesive embolization and sclerotherapy.

Recurrent lower limb venous insufficiency is often a challenge in clinical practice and is most commonly due to incompetent perforators. Many of these patients do not have adequate symptom relief with compression and require some form of treatment for incompetent perforator interruption. Various treatment methods have been tried with different efficiencies. Objective To evaluate the feasibility, efficiency and safety of an outpatient combined cyanoacrylate adhesion-sodium tetradecyl sulphate sclerotherapy for treatment of patients with symptoms of persistent or recurrent lower limb venous insufficiency secondary to incompetent perforators. Methods Eighty-three limbs of 69 patients with symptoms of persistent or recurrent lower limb venous insufficiency secondary to incompetent perforators were treated with cyanoacrylate embolization of incompetent perforators and sclerotherapy of dilated collateral veins (surface branch varicose veins). Technical success, procedural pain, perforator occlusion, venous occlusion, clinical improvement and ulcer healing were assessed. Follow-up was done three- and six-month post-procedure. Results Procedure could be successfully performed in all patients. One hundred and ninety-one perforators were treated in total. Perforator and varicose veins occlusion rate was 100%. Deep venous extension of cyanoacrylate occurred in four (4.8%) patients, with no adverse clinical outcome. Venous clinical severity score improved from a baseline of 8.18 ± 3.60 to 4.30 ± 2.48 on three-month follow-up and 2.42 ± 1.52 on six-month follow-up (p < 0.0001). All ulcers showed complete healing within three months. Significant prolonged thrombophlebitis occurred in 38.5% of limbs. Conclusion Combined cyanoacrylate adhesion and setrol sclerotherapy is technically easy, has a lot of advantages including being an outpatient procedure and highly efficacious but with a guarded safety profile.

Surgical treatment of recurrent varicose veins in the lower limbs associated with endovascular treatment of iliac vein stenosis.

OBJECTIVE: We present our experience with endovascular surgery for recurrent varicose veins (RVV) of the lower limbs combined with the iliac vein compression syndrome (IVCS). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study was a retrospective analysis of 6 patients with RVVs combined with IVCS who were admitted to our hospital between January 2007 and December 2014. Transfemoral venography was performed to confirm IVCS. Balloon dilation and stent placement were successful in all 6 patients. The varicose veins were treated by traditional surgery after the endovascular therapy. The visual analog pain scale (VAS) score and venous clinical severity score (VCSS) were collected before surgery and at 6-months follow-up, and were analyzed using the paired student t-test. Patency of the iliac vein was assessed via duplex Doppler ultrasound. RESULTS: The rate of technical success was 100%. There was a significant (p < .001) improvement in VCSS postoperatively. During the 6-month follow-up period, no RVVs were observed and the rate of iliac vein patency was 100%. Importantly, VAS ratings also decreased significantly (p < .001) during the follow-up. CONCLUSION: Endovascular surgery for IVCS combined with traditional surgery focused on varicose veins is an effective procedure for treating RVVs of the lower limbs associated with IVCS within 6 months.

Symptomatic recurrent varicose veins due to primary avalvular varicose anomalies (PAVA): A previously unreported cause of recurrence.

A 56-year-old woman presented in 2006 with symptomatic primary varicose veins in her right leg. Venous duplex ultrasonography at that time showed what appeared to be "neovascular tissue" around the saphenofemoral junction. However, there had been no previous trauma or surgery in this area. This appearance has subsequently been described as primary avalvular varicose anomalies. She underwent endovenous treatment at that time. In 2018, she presented with symptomatic recurrent varicose veins of the same leg. Venous duplex ultrasonography showed successful ablation of the great saphenous and anterior accessory saphenous veins. All of the recurrent venous reflux was arising from the primary avalvular varicose anomalies. This report shows that primary avalvular varicose anomalies is a previously unreported cause of recurrent varicose veins and leads us to suggest that if found, treatment of the primary avalvular varicose anomalies should be considered at the primary procedure.

A review of a new Dutch guideline for management of recurrent varicose veins.

In 2013, the new Dutch guideline for "Venous Pathology" was published. The guideline was a revision and update from the guideline "Diagnostics and Treatment of Varicose Veins" from 2009 and the guideline "Venous Ulcer" from 2005. A guideline for "Deep Venous Pathology" and one for "Compression Therapy" was added to the overall guideline "Venous Pathology." The chapter about treatment of recurrent varicose veins after initial intervention was recently updated in 2015 and is reviewed here. The Dutch term "recidief varices" or the French "récidive de varices" should be used analogous to the English term "recurrent varicose veins." The DCOP Guideline Development Group Neovarices concluded that "recidief" in Dutch actually suggests recurrence after apparent successful treatment and ignores the natural progression of venous disease in its own right. So the group opted to use the term "neovarices." In the Dutch guideline, neovarices is meant to be an all embracing term for recurrent varicose veins caused by technical or tactical failure, evolvement from residual refluxing veins or natural progression of varicose vein disease at different locations of the treated leg after intervention. This report reviews the most important issues in the treatment of varicose vein recurrence, and discusses conclusions and recommendations of the Dutch Neovarices Guideline Committee.

Role of PTFE Patch Saphenoplasty in Reducing Neovascularization and Recurrence in Varicose Veins.

Varicose veins have a high recurrence rate following surgery. Besides poor surgical technique, majority of these recurrences are attributable to neovascularization after both primary and repeat surgery. Authors have studied the effectiveness of a polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) patch interposition between the ligated vein stump and the overlying soft tissue at saphenofemoral junction in decreasing recurrence of varicose veins after initial surgery. Study was conducted on 50 patients of varicose veins with saphenofemoral junction incompetence. Patients were randomly divided into two groups, group A and group B alternately. In group A, standard surgical procedure was done followed by PTFE patch application. In group B, same surgical procedure was applied as in group A, with the exception of PTFE patch application. Patients in both groups were given similar postoperative care. A full venous duplex ultrasound assessment was performed in all the patients postoperatively. Neovascularization was observed in five patients (20 %) of group B, while it was not seen in any of the patients in group A at 1-year follow-up. This difference in neovascularization across the two groups was found to be statistically significant with a p value of 0.0251. Hence, authors concluded that patch saphenoplasty helps in reducing recurrence in varicose veins by decreasing neovascularization at saphenofemoral junction.

Causes of recurrent lower limb varicose veins after surgical interventions in 141 limbs - five-year retrospective analysis of two centers.

AIM: The purpose of this study was to explore the causes of recurrent lower limb varicose veins after surgical interventions. METHODS: A retrospective five-year survey was conducted on patients who underwent second surgery due to recurrent lower limb varicose veins after surgical interventions. A total of 141 limbs (112 cases), including 72 cases of left lower limbs, 47 of right lower limbs and 22 of both limbs, were involved in the study. All patients underwent lower limb venography (141 limbs were anterograde and 28 cases were retrograde), and then examined with color-Doppler ultrasound. RESULTS: The major causes that urged patients to undergo second surgery are clinical changes graded above CEAP IV (93.6%), limb edema without changes on skin (5%), and single varicosity (1.4%). Up to 127 (83%) limbs exhibited perforating venous reflux, 67 (47.5%) limbs had varied degrees of deep venous insufficiency and 68 (48.2%) limbs had through or above-the-knee great saphenous vein trunk residual. CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative venography before operation is indispensible in confirming the diagnosis and operation strategies. Patients with severe primary deep venous reflux and symptoms up to C3 may need simultaneous repair of the deep venous valves.

Day-case re-do varicose vein surgery.

OBJECTIVE: To assess whether re-do varicose vein surgery as a day case is feasible and safe. METHODS: Data were collected retrospectively on 70 consecutive patients (77 legs) undergoing re-do sapheno-femoral or sapheno-popliteal ligation by consultant surgeons as day cases. Follow-up was by structured telephone interview. RESULTS: The 70 patients comprised 53 females and 17 males. Median age and body mass index were 47.5 years and 27, respectively. All patients were ASA Grade I or II. Median operating time was 75 min (range 25-140). Of the 70 patients intended to be treated as day cases, four (5.7%) were admitted overnight. There were no were re-admissions nor did any patient develop deep vein thrombosis. Eleven per cent developed wound infection and 4% transient lymphatic leakage. Overall, 91% of patients were pleased with the initial surgical result but this decreased to 81% in the longer term. Eighty-nine per cent would have their surgery performed again as a day case. CONCLUSION: Re-do sapheno-femoral or sapheno-popliteal can be performed safely as a day case.