Outcomes of a single-center experience with classification and treatment of endothermal heat-induced thrombosis after endovenous ablation.

OBJECTIVE: Endothermal heat-induced thrombosis (EHIT) is a known complication of endothermal venous ablation procedures. EHIT can lead to deep vein thrombosis/pulmonary embolism, which cause significant disability and, rarely, death. Other studies have evaluated risk factors for EHIT. There is an accepted grading system for EHIT, but there is no consensus on treatment type, duration, or follow-up. We retrospectively evaluated all cases of EHIT after radiofrequency ablation or endovenous laser ablation at our institution during a 7-year period, focusing on classification, treatment, and outcomes of EHIT. METHODS: The analysis included all patients aged >18 years who underwent radiofrequency ablation or endovenous laser ablation at our institution, Spectrum Health Hospital Vein Solutions (Grand Rapids, Mich), between January 1, 2008, and December 31, 2014. Electronic medical records were queried retrospectively to identify patients with EHIT during the study interval by International Classification of Diseases-Ninth Revision code. Demographic data, including age, gender, comorbidities (eg, history of deep venous thrombosis, hypercoagulable state, family history of blood clots, etc), body mass index, Clinical, Etiology, Anatomy, and Pathophysiology (CEAP) classification, and use of preoperative anticoagulation were collected for each patient in the registry. Each patient had a required postoperative duplex ultrasound (US) examination within 1 to 2 weeks of the procedure. Preoperative and postoperative US imaging data and procedure-specific data were also recorded for each patient. EHIT was graded from 1 to 4 by review of the US studies. Each patient's treatment course was reviewed for type of anticoagulation, duration of treatment, follow-up imaging, and outcome. RESULTS: From 2008 to 2014, 4799 ablations were performed at Spectrum Health Hospital Vein Center, and EHIT was identified in 70 patients. At presentation, 87% of patients were asymptomatic, 10% reported pain, and 2.9% reported swelling. Patients with EHIT grades 1 or 2 were treated with daily aspirin, and most of those with grades 3 or 4 were treated with systemic anticoagulation. Repeat US imaging was performed at 1 to 2 weeks to evaluate progression. Progression was not seen in any patients treated with systemic anticoagulation (grades 3-4). Thrombus progression occurred in two patients with grades 1 or 2 EHIT treated with aspirin. A bleeding complication occurred in one patient. CONCLUSIONS: EHIT after endovenous ablation occurred in ∼1.5% of patients, which is similar to that reported in the literature. Our review shows that systemic anticoagulation is effective in the prevention of progression with a low risk of bleeding complications. Patients with EHIT grades 1 or 2 can be treated with aspirin alone with a low risk of progression (3%).

Cosmetic sclerotherapy.

Telangiectasias and spider veins are considered a common cosmetic concern for both women and men. Sclerotherapy is a frequently used, low-risk, and highly successful method to treat these venous problems. This article reviews the pathophysiology and diagnosis of telangiectasias and reticular veins as well as the currently available agents and techniques of sclerotherapy. The possible complications and adverse outcomes of sclerotherapy are described. Standard care and follow-up for patients after the procedure are outlined. Also included are tips and tricks found to be valuable in a busy vein practice.

Outcomes for forearm and upper arm arteriovenous fistula creation with the transposition technique.

OBJECTIVE: To study the outcomes of three different types of arteriovenous fistula (AVF) transpositions (forearm cephalic vein transposition [FACVT], upper arm cephalic vein transposition [UACVT], and upper arm basilic vein transposition [UABVT]) for dialysis patients in a single center. METHODS: A 6-year retrospective review, from 2006 to 2012, was conducted at a single institution in which the surgical outcomes for three different types of AVF transposition were reviewed. Preoperative duplex vein mapping was obtained in all patients to choose the best vein for access. RESULTS: There were 165 patients identified with 77 FACVTs, 52 UACVTs, and 36 UABVTs. Primary access maturation rates for the FACVT, UACVT, and UABVT groups were 86%, 90%, and 97%, respectively (P = .19). All transposed, matured primary AVFs were used after a mean of 9.9 weeks, without additional intervention. Primary 1-year patency for the FACVT, UACVT, and UABVT groups were 63%, 61%, and 70%, respectively (P = .71). Primary assisted 1-year patency for the FACVT, UACVT, and UABVT groups were 93%, 93%, and 100%, respectively (P > .999). Mean operating room times and time to intervention were not significantly different between the groups. The postoperative hematoma rate was 2% and wound infection rate was 2%. Multivariate analysis indicated no significant predictors of time to failure (P > .05). CONCLUSIONS: With low primary failure rates, reduced need for secondary interventions before maturation, and 1-year primary assisted patency rates in excess of 93%, our study showed that the transposition technique, in our experience, is superior to previously published literature in hemodialysis access creation.

Preliminary results of Zenith Fenestrated abdominal aortic aneurysm endovascular grafts.

BACKGROUND: Patients with juxtarenal aortic aneurysms who are unfit for open repair may be considered for fenestrated endovascular repair (fenEVAR). We report our initial experience with fenEVAR. METHODS: We reviewed the data on all our patients receiving fenEVAR for juxtarenal aortic aneurysms. RESULTS: Eight patients, average age 75 years, underwent fenEVAR. Endografts were designed from details obtained from preoperative computed tomography angiography. There were 6 grafts with superior mesenteric scallops and bilateral renal fenestrations, 1 with bilateral renal scallops, and 1 with a single renal fenestration. All patients survived 30 days. There was no renal failure requiring dialysis. At 10 weeks, 1 patient died from acute intestinal ischemia and multisystem organ failure, and another died from respiratory failure. CONCLUSIONS: It is feasible to offer fenEVAR to patients who are poor candidates for open repair. However, these procedures are technically challenging. Early outcomes are less favorable than other aortic endovascular procedures.