The correlation between Caprini score and the risk of venous thromboembolism after varicose vein surgery.

BACKGROUND: The study aims to identify the incidence of symptomatic and asymptomatic venous thromboembolism (VTE) after minimally invasive varicose vein surgery and to assess the predictability of the Caprini risk score (CRS). METHODS: CAPrini Score In Venous Surgery (NCT03041805) is a registry-based prospective study that enrolls patients undergoing minimally invasive open (high ligation, stripping, miniphlebectomy) and endovascular (thermal and non-thermal ablation) surgery on varicose veins. The main inclusion criteria are CRS assessment before intervention and a duplex ultrasound scan performance within 2-4 weeks after surgery. The primary outcome is a combination of asymptomatic or symptomatic DVT, including EHIT of class 2-4 and PE. RESULTS: Totally 1878 records with defined outcomes were analyzed. The mean age of patients was 46.9±13.3 years; 66% were female. Endovenous laser ablation was performed in 88%. Varicose tributaries were treated in 40%, perforating veins in 3.9% of cases. CRS ranged from 1 to 12 (mean of 4.0±1.5). Prophylactic anticoagulation was prescribed in 20%. The primary outcome was reported in 63 cases (3.4%; 95% CI, 2.7-4.3%), comprising asymptomatic (N.=29, 1.5%) or symptomatic (N.=10, 0.5%) DVT or EHIT (n=28, 1.6%). No PE was reported. A significant correlation was found between CRS and VTE incidence (P=0.001). Under logistic regression CRS (OR, 1.3; 95% CI, 1.1-1.6) along with treatment of tributaries (OR, 6.3; 95% CI, 3.0-13.0) and perforating veins (OR, 10.7; 95% CI, 3.8-30.2) were associated with VTE in the absence of prophylactic anticoagulation. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of VTE after ablation of superficial veins is 3.4%, predominantly due to asymptomatic EHIT and DVT, and significantly correlates with CRS.

A randomized clinical trial to assess the impact of laser power with constant linear endovenous energy density on outcomes of endovenous laser ablation (SLEDGE trial).

OBJECTIVE: To date, conflicting evidence has been reported regarding the energy settings to use during endovenous laser ablation (EVLA). In the present study, we evaluated the outcomes of EVLA of the great saphenous veins (GSVs) using different power settings with the same linear endovenous energy density (LEED) of ∼70 J/cm. METHODS: We performed a single-center, randomized, controlled noninferiority trial with a blinded outcome assessment of patients with varicose veins of the GSV who underwent EVLA with a wavelength of 1470 nm and a radial fiber. The patients were randomly assigned to three groups according to the energy setting: group 1, 5 W power and an automatic fiber traction speed of 0.7 mm/s (LEED, 71.4 J/cm); group 2, 7 W and 1.0 mm/s (LEED, 70 J/cm); and group 3, 10 W and 1.5 mm/s (LEED, 66.7 J/cm). The primary outcome was the rate of GSV occlusion at 6 months. The secondary outcomes were pain intensity along the target vein the next day and at 1 week and 2 months after EVLA, the necessity for analgesics, and the occurrence of significant complications. RESULTS: From February 2017 to June 2020, 245 lower extremities of 203 patients were enrolled. Groups 1, 2, and 3 included 83, 79, and 83 limbs, respectively. At 6 months of follow-up, 214 lower extremities were examined with duplex ultrasound. GSV occlusion was observed in 72 of 72 limbs (100%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 100%-100%) in group 1 and 70 of 71 limbs (98.6%; 95% CI, 97%-100%) in groups 2 and 3 (P < .05 for noninferiority). No difference was found in the pain level, necessity for analgesics, or rate of any other complications. CONCLUSIONS: The technical results, pain level, and complications of EVLA were not associated with the combination of energy power (5-10 W) and the speed of automatic fiber traction when a similar LEED of ∼70 J/cm was reached.

Current status of endothermal heat induced thrombosis.

There remain many questions regarding the pathophysiology and risk factors for endothermal heat induced thrombosis formation. Moreover, there are a paucity of data on the timing of its occurrence, and there has been no consensus regarding for its treatment. The purpose of this review was to summarize the current knowledge on the pathophysiology, risk factors and treatment strategies for endothermal heat induced thrombosis. The PubMed database was searched from 2001 to present for endothermal heat induced thrombosis, EHIT, deep vein thrombosis, chronic venous insufficiency, varicose veins, endovenous laser and radiofrequency ablation (treatment). All relevant articles identified by the authors mentioning endothermal heat induced thrombosis were included in this review. A multitude of risk factors, several pathophysiological hypotheses and different treatment strategies are described in the literature. Endothermal heat induced thrombosis is marginally understood. There remains a theoretical risk for significant venous thromboembolic complications. With the new uniform classification of EHIT (American Venous Forum), healthcare providers should continue to investigate the nature of this event.