Fake-news-free evidence-based communication for proper vein-lymphatic disease management.

Published scientific evidence demonstrate the current spread of healthcare misinformation in the most popular social networks and unofficial communication channels. Up to 40% of the medical websites were identified reporting inappropriate information, moreover being shared more than 450,000 times in a 5-year-time frame. The phenomenon is particularly spread in infective diseases medicine, oncology and cardiovascular medicine. The present document is the result of a scientific and educational endeavor by a worldwide group of top experts who selected and analyzed the major issues and related evidence-based facts on vein and lymphatic management. A section of this work is entirely dedicated to the patients and therefore written in layman terms, with the aim of improving public vein-lymphatic awareness. The part dedicated to the medical professionals includes a revision of the current literature, summing up the statements that are fully evidence-based in venous and lymphatic disease management, and suggesting future lines of research to fulfill the still unmet needs. The document has been written following an intense digital interaction among dedicated working groups, leading to an institutional project presentation during the Universal Expo in Dubai, in the occasion of the v-WINter 2022 meeting.

Upper limb secondary lymphedema ultrasound mapping and characterization.

BACKGROUND: Ultrasound investigation potentials in lymphedema are still to be fully used in everyday practice. Aim of the present study was to report the sonographic characterization of the dermo-epidermal complex (DEC) and of the subcutaneous (SUBC) tissue, assessing the feasibility of a related mapping, in upper limb secondary lymphedema. METHODS: In this retrospective study 287 patients affected by monolateral upper limb post-mastectomy lymphedema (M5/F282; mean age 64±4.24) were enrolled and scanned by ultrasound, considering the healthy contralateral limb as control. In order to standardize the assessment, the limb was divided in sectors: 4 anterior, 4 posterior below the elbow, 4 anterior and 4 posterior above the elbow, plus the hand. DEC and SUBC regions B-mode appearance were reported, both in the healthy and in the pathological arms. DEC thickness was measured and compared among the same sectors of the healthy and pathological limbs. RESULTS: DEC and SUBC sonographic appearance was differentiated in fluid and sclerotic. DEC included a third category characterized by differentiation loss. The different sectors showed significantly different lymphatic involvement in the affected limb. In the comparison with the contralateral unaffected segments a significantly thicker DEC was reported in the forearm affected by lymphedema (P<0.005), while no significant difference was reported at the arm level. CONCLUSIONS: Traditional ultrasonography can provide a secondary upper limb lymphedema characterization with related mapping and useful data for a better lymphatic physiopathology understanding and for a properly addressed therapeutic protocol.

Patient safety in phlebology: The ACP Phlebology Safety Checklist.

Objectives To assess the current use of safety checklists among the American College of Phlebology (ACP) members and their interest in implementing a checklist supported by the ACP on their clinical practices; and to develop a phlebology safety checklist. Method Online surveys were sent to ACP members, and a phlebology safety checklist was developed by a multispecialty team through the ACP Leadership Academy. Results Forty-seven percent of respondents are using a safety checklist in their practices; 23% think that a phlebology safety checklist would interfere or disrupt workflow; 79% answered that a phlebology safety checklist could improve procedure outcomes or prevent complications; and 85% would be interested in implementing a phlebology safety checklist approved by the ACP. Conclusion A phlebology safety checklist was developed with the intent to increase awareness on patient safety and improve outcome in phlebology practice.

Multicenter assessment of venous reflux by duplex ultrasound.

OBJECTIVE: This prospective multicenter investigation was conducted to define the repeatability of duplex-based identification of venous reflux and the relative effect of key parameters on the reproducibility of the test. METHODS: Repeatability was studied by having the same technologist perform duplicate tests, at the same time of the day, using the same reflux-provoking maneuver and with the patient in the same position. Reproducibility was examined by having two different technologists perform the test at the same time of the day, using the same reflux-provoking maneuver and with the patient in the same position. Facilitated reproducibility was studied by having two different technologists examine the same patients immediately after an educational intervention. Limits of agreement between two duplex scans were studied by changing three elements of the test: time of the day (morning vs afternoon), patient's position (standing vs supine), and reflux initiation (manual vs automatic compression-decompression). RESULTS: The study enrolled 17 healthy volunteers and 57 patients with primary chronic venous disease. Repeatability of reflux time measurements in deep veins did not significantly differ with the time of day, the patient's position, or the reflux-provoking maneuver. Reflux measurements in the superficial veins were more repeatable (P < .05) when performed in the morning with the patient standing. The agreement between the clinical interpretations significantly depended on a selected cut point (Spearman's ρ, -0.4; P < .01). Interpretations agreed in 93.4% of the replicated measurements when a 0.5-second cut point was selected. The training intervention improved the frequency of agreement to 94.4% (κ = 0.9). Alternations of the time of the duplex scan, the patient's position, and the reflux-provoking maneuver significantly decreased reliability. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides evidence to develop a new standard for duplex ultrasound detection of venous reflux. Reports should include information on the time of the test, the patient's position, and the provoking maneuver used. Adopting a uniform cut point of 0.5 second for pathologic reflux can significantly improve the reliability of reflux detection. Implementation of a standard protocol should elevate the minimal standard for agreement between repeated tests from the current 70% to at least 80% and with more rigid standardization, to 90%.

Comparisons of side effects using air and carbon dioxide foam for endovenous chemical ablation.

OBJECTIVE: This clinical study evaluated prospectively adverse events immediately following ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy (UGFS) for the treatment of lower extremity venous valvular insufficiency. Incidence of side effects associated with carbon dioxide (CO(2)) foam was compared with a historical control using air-based foam. The literature on the subject was reviewed. METHODS: Vital signs were monitored during and immediately after UGFS, and adverse events were recorded for 24 hours following the procedure. The air-based foam group had 49 patients: 44 women and 5 men. The CO(2)-based foam group had 128 patients: 115 women and 13 men. CEAP class was C2EpAsPr, describing varicose veins, primary etiology, and saphenous reflux. UGFS followed thermal ablation of the great saphenous vein. Foam was prepared using the three-way tap technique to mix gas with 1% polidocanol in a 4:1 ratio. Segments of the great and small saphenous veins and their tributaries were treated with UGFS. Foam volumes injected were 27 +/- 10 (SD) (6-46 range) and 25 +/- 12 (6-57 range) mL for air- and CO(2)-based foams respectively (P = .39). Incidence of adverse events was compared by chi(2) statistics. Vital signs were compared by paired t test. RESULTS: During the procedure, the average heart rate decreased by less than 5 bpm for both groups (P < .001), and blood pressure decreased by less than 3 mm Hg in the CO(2) group (P < .02). Respiratory rate, electrocardiogram, and pulse oxymetry did not change significantly in both air- and CO(2)-foam series (P > .05). Visual disturbances were experienced by 3.1% (4/128) and 8.2% (4/49) patients in the CO(2) and air groups respectively (P = .15). Respiratory difficulties or circumoral paresthesia each occurred in 0.8% (n = 1) of the CO(2) patients. Incidence of chest tightness (3.1% vs 18%), dry cough (1.6% vs 16%), or dizziness (3.1% vs 12%) were significantly lower in the CO(2) vs air groups (P < .02). Nausea occurred in 2% and 4% of the CO(2) and air-based foam groups (P = .53). Overall, the proportion of patients describing side effects decreased from 39% (19/49) to 11% (14/128) as CO(2) replaced air for foam preparation (P < .001). Similar findings were described in the literature of air-based foam but data on the use of physiological gas were rare. CONCLUSIONS: Side effects decreased significantly if CO(2) rather than air was employed to make the sclerosing foam for chemical ablation of superficial veins of the lower extremity.