[Varicosis-Current treatment concepts]. / Varikosis ­ aktuelle Therapiekonzepte.

Varicosis is a chronic progressive disease characterized by varicose veins of the lower extremities. Pain, swelling and heaviness of the legs are typical symptoms. These symptoms are caused by a pathological venous reflux, arising from a weakness of the vein wall and progressive venous insufficiency. The indications for invasive surgery are the symptomatic clinical, etiological, anatomical, pathophysiological (CEAP) stages C2s-C6. Compression therapy and venoactive drugs can be recommended for conservative therapy. When it comes to surgical treatment conventional open vein surgery is associated with the best long-term results. Endovenous thermal ablation is associated with few postoperative complications and favors earlier mobilization of the patient. Sclerotherapy has become established with good clinical results for the ablation of reticular and telangiectatic veins, for recurrences and complicated vein anatomy.

Impact of great saphenous vein ablation on healing and recurrence of venous leg ulcers in patients with post-thrombotic syndrome: A retrospective comparative study.

BACKGROUND: The optimal treatment approach for patients with active venous leg ulcers (VLUs) and post-thrombotic syndrome (PTS) associated with great saphenous vein (GSV) reflux remains unclear. To address this gap, we retrospectively compared the outcomes of patients with post-thrombotic VLU with an intact GSV vs those with a stripped or ablated GSV. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed data from 48 patients with active VLUs and documented PTS, who were treated at a single center between January 2018 and December 2022. Clinical information, including ulcer photographs, was recorded in a prospectively maintained digital database at the initial and follow-up visits. Two patient groups-group A (with an intact GSV) and group B (with a stripped or ablated GSV)-were compared in terms of time to complete healing, proportion of ulcers achieving complete healing, and ulcer recurrence during the follow-up period. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in age, gender, initial ulcer size, or ulcer duration between the two groups. All included patients had femoropopliteal post-thrombotic changes. Group A had significantly more completely healed ulcers (33 of 34 ulcers, 97%) compared with group B (10 of 14 ulcers, 71%) (P = .008). Group A also exhibited a significantly shorter time to complete ulcer healing (median: 42.5 days, interquartile range [IQR]: 65) compared with group B (median: 161 days, IQR: 530.5) (P = .0177), with a greater probability of ulcer healing (P = .0084). Long-term follow-up data were available for 45 of 48 patients (93.7%), with a mean duration of 39.6 months (range: 5.7-67.4 months). The proportion of ulcers that failed to heal or recurred during the follow-up period was significantly lower in group A (9 of 32 ulcers, 27%) compared with group B (11 of 13 ulcers, 85%) (P = .0009). In addition, in a subgroup analysis, patients with an intact but refluxing GSV (12 of 34) had a significantly shorter time to heal (median: 34 days, IQR: 57.25) (P = .0242), with a greater probability of ulcer healing (P = .0091) and significantly fewer recurrences (2 of 12, 16%) (P = .006) compared with group B. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that removal of the GSV through stripping or ablation in patients with post-thrombotic deep venous systems affecting the femoropopliteal segment may result in delayed ulcer healing and increased ulcer recurrence. Patients with an intact GSV had better outcomes, even when the refluxing GSV was left untreated. These findings emphasize the potential impact of GSV treatment on the management of VLUs in individuals with PTS. Further investigation is needed to validate these results and explore alternative therapeutic strategies to optimize outcomes for this patient population.

Valvar bypass surgery to ameliorate persistent lower limb edema caused by post-thrombotic syndrome: a case report and literature review.

Obstruction and/or reflux compromise during venous emptying can facilitate different pathophysiologies in chronic venous insufficiency (CVI). We present a patient with persistent lower limb CVI edema caused by post-thrombotic syndrome (PTS), who responded well to femoral vein valve therapy via axillary vein bypass after unsuccessful valvuloplasty, and led a normal life. During a 12 month observation period, bridging vessels completely restored original anatomical structures. In a literature study, no similar surgeries were reported, but we show that this operation may be feasible in selected patients.

[Randomized controlled study on the application effect of a new type of intravenous radiofrequency closed therapy system made in China and an imported system].

Objective: To compare the application effect of domestic and imported intravenous radiofrequency closure system in the treatment of primary varicose veins of lower extremities. Methods: This single-center prospective, non-inferiority randomized controlled trial was performed in the Department of Vascular Surgery, the Fourth Affiliated Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine from January 2021 to January 2022. Patients with primary varicose veins of lower extremities who met the ataxation criteria were randomly assigned to the experimental group(domestic novel venous radiofrequency closure system) or the control group(imported venous radiofrequency closure system) in a ratio of 1∶1. The two groups of subjects were compared in terms of target vein closure rate, technical success rate, system operation performance, incidence of adverse events and incidence of serious adverse events(SAE) within 6 months after surgery. Quantitative data were compared by Mann-Whitney U test, and categorical data were compared by χ2 test and non-inferiority test. Results: A total of 80 subjects were included in the trial (41 in the experimental group and 39 in the control group), including 27 males and 53 females, aged (M(IQR)) 55(23) years (range:40 to 78 years). There were 48 cases of left lower limb and 32 cases of right lower limb. The technical success rate and system control performance between the groups were 100%.The incidence of adverse events (58.5% (24/41) vs. 61.5% (24/39), χ2=0.075, P=0.784), and the incidence of SAE (7.3% (3/41) vs. 5.1% (2/39), χ2=0.163, P=0.686) within 6 months after surgery in experimental group and control group had no statistical significance. There was one device-related adverse event in each of the two groups. In the experimental group, one patient developed endovenous heat-induced thrombosis after surgery and recovered after taking rivaroxaban tablets. One patient in the control group had pain in the upper right thigh for more than 1 day after operation, which was cured after using analgesic cream. No device-related SAE occurred. The venous closure rate of the experimental group was 100% (38/38) at 6 months after surgery, and that of the control group was 97.4% (37/38). The difference between the two groups was 2.63% (95%CI:-3.19 to 8.45, Z=4.865, P<0.01), and the 95%CI lower limit of the difference in target venous closure rate between two groups was greater than the non-inferiority threshold of -10.00%. Conclusion: The early application effect of the new domestic intravenous radiofrequency closure system in patients with primary varicose veins of lower extremities is in line with expectations, it is not inferior to the imported system.

Mechanochemical ablation: disappointing long-term anatomic results and worsening symptoms.

An updated report on the five-year results in the treatment of great saphenous vein incompetence with mechanochemical ablation (MOCA) provides additional evidence for higher rates of anatomic recanalization compared to other treatment modalities and progressive worsening of symptoms with time.

Laser-sclerosing foam hybrid treatment, a non-tumescent technique for insufficient great saphenous vein ablation.

OBJECTIVE: We aim to report on the Laser-Sclerosing Foam Hybrid Treatment (LSFHT) and its outcomes when used on patients with great saphenous vein (GSV) insufficiency. METHODS: This was a single center retrospective cohort study on patients with GSV insufficiency that were treated with the LSFHT technique, a surgical procedure that comprises the use of both sclerosing foam and endovenous ablation and avoids the use of tumescent anesthesia. Occlusion rates and complications were reported. RESULTS: 139 legs from 106 patients were operated, achieving a 100% occlusion rate, while only a small burn and 2 popliteal vein thrombosis cases occurred. CONCLUSION: The study suggests that the LSFHT is a feasible fast procedure that proved both effective and safe for the treatment of GSV insufficiency.

Factors influencing recurrent varicose vein formation after radiofrequency thermal ablation for truncal reflux performed in two high-volume venous centers.

OBJECTIVE: Recanalization of the saphenous vein trunk after endovenous radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is often associated with recurrent varicose veins (RVVs) or recanalization. This study aimed to assess the long-term results of RFA of the great saphenous vein (GSV) and identify the risk factors for GSV recanalization and RVVs during follow-up for patients presenting to dedicated outpatient vein centers. METHODS: All consecutive patients with incompetent GSVs who underwent RFA between 2009 and 2019 were retrospectively analyzed. The primary study end points were freedom from GSV recanalization and the RVV rate during follow-up. The secondary study end points were the postoperative complication rate and the risk factors for GSV recanalization and RVVs. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify the potential risk factors for GSV recanalization and RVVs. RESULTS: During the study period, 1568 limbs were treated in 1300 consecutive patients (mean age, 53.5 ± 12.9 years; 71.9% women; CEAP [clinical, etiology, anatomy, pathophysiology] C2-C6; venous clinical severity score >5). Technical success was achieved in 99.7% of cases. At a mean follow-up of 57.2 ± 25.4 months, the GSV occlusion and freedom from reintervention rates were 100% and 100% within 1 week, 97% and 95.7% at 1 year, 95.2% and 93.1% at 3 years, and 92.4% and 92.8% at 5 years, respectively. The recurrence rate was 10% (n = 158) during the follow-up period. On multivariate analysis, a direct confluence of the accessory saphenous vein into the saphenofemoral junction (odds ratio [OR], 1.561; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.0-7.04; P = .032), a history of pregnancy >2 (OR, 3.68; 95% CI, 1.19-11.36; P = .023), C4 (OR, 6.41; 95% CI, 1.36-30.28; P = .019), and preoperative GSV diameter >10 mm (OR, 1.82; 95% CI, 1.65-4.03; P = .043) were risk factors for GSV recanalization. Moreover, age >70 years (OR, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.01-1.06; P = .014) and incompetent perforator veins (OR, 1.17; 95% CI, 0.65-2.03; P = .018) were also risk factors for RVVs. CONCLUSIONS: RFA is a safe technique to ablate the GSV with a low complication rate and durability during 5 years of follow-up. However, patients with a high clinical score and those with direct confluence of the accessory saphenous vein into the saphenofemoral junction experienced higher long-term GSV recanalization and RVV rates.

A systematic review on ablation techniques for larger saphenous veins in patients with symptomatic superficial venous disease.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to summarize the existing evidence for the treatment of saphenous veins >10 mm in diameter, to determine whether there were vein size limits for treatment modalities, and to determine if there are specific technical considerations for treatment of large veins. METHODS: We searched the literature for reports of treatment methods and outcomes for patients with large-diameter saphenous veins treated with various ablation methods between 1993 and 2023. These studies were evaluated for the size of the vein determined as "large diameter," type of ablation method, study type, outcomes, adverse events, and any technical considerations noted. A systematic review was conducted and reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) methodology. The COVIDENCE software was used for full-text screening and data extraction. Three reviewers reviewed the data, and the content expert served as the tiebreaker. RESULTS: Seventy-one records were identified, of which 24 studies were deemed appropriate for extraction. Most of the studies identified reported outcomes of endovenous thermal ablation modalities. There were fewer studies on non-thermal, non-tumescent techniques, and these studies reported an overall lower occlusion rate compared with endovenous thermal ablation techniques. CONCLUSIONS: Large head-to-head trials or randomized controlled that compare all the modalities over a long follow-up duration are yet to be performed. In the existing literature, there is considerable heterogeneity in terms of the study size, design, definition of large veins, site of vein measurement, and follow-up periods, making it challenging to make fair comparisons and draw firm conclusions. Currently available evidence supports the use of endothermal ablation techniques for the treatment of veins >10 mm in diameter as they have a more favorable efficacy and safety profile and have a larger body of evidence available compared with non-thermal, non-tumescent techniques or surgery.

Variations and inconsistencies in venous ablation coverage policies between single-state and multistate carriers in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Vein ablation is a common and effective treatment for patients with chronic venous insufficiency. The overuse of vein ablation despite the existence of evidence-based guidelines has resulted in insurance companies developing restrictive policies for coverage that create barriers to appropriate care. This study compares the insurance coverage by single-state carriers (SSCs) and multistate carriers (MSCs), highlighting the variations and inconsistencies in the various policies. METHODS: The American Venous Forum Venous Policy Navigator was reviewed for the various policies available in the United States. The policies were divided into SSCs and MSCs. The characteristics of the policies, including the anatomic and hemodynamic criteria for specific veins, duration of conservative treatment, disease severity, symptoms, and types of procedures covered, were compared between the two groups. SAS, version 9.4 (SAS Institute Inc) was used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: A total of 122 policies were analyzed and divided between SSCs (n = 85; 69.7%) and MSCs (n = 37; 30.3%). A significant variation was found in the size requirement for great saphenous vein ablation. Although 48% of the policies did not specify a size criterion, the remaining policies indicated a minimal size, ranging from 3 to 5.5 mm. However, no significant differences were found between SSCs and MSCs. Similar findings were encountered for the small and anterior accessory saphenous veins. MSCs were more likely to define a saphenous reflux time >500 ms compared with SSCs (81.1% vs 58.8%; P = .04). A significant difference was found between the SSCs and MSCs in the criteria for perforator ablation in terms of size and reflux time. MSCs were significantly more likely to provide coverage for mechanochemical ablation than were SSCs (24.3% vs 8.2%; P = .03). SSCs were more likely to require ≥12 weeks of compression stocking therapy than were MSCs (76.5% vs 48.7%; P = .01). No significant differences were found in the clinical indications between the two groups; however, MSCs were more likely to mention major hemorrhage than were SSCs. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study highlight the variations in policies for venous ablation, in particular, the striking inconsistencies in size criteria. MSCs were more likely to cover mechanochemical ablation and require a shorter duration of conservative therapy before intervention compared with SSCs. Evidence-based guidance is needed to develop more coherent policies for venous ablation coverage.

Increased body mass index and vein diameter are associated with incomplete target vein closure following microfoam ablation of incompetent saphenous veins.

OBJECTIVE: Patient characteristics and risk factors for incomplete or non-closure following thermal saphenous vein ablation have been reported. However, similar findings have not been clearly described following commercially manufactured polidocanol microfoam ablation (MFA). The objective of our study is to identify predictive factors and outcomes associated with non-closure following MFA of symptomatic, refluxing saphenous veins. METHODS: A retrospective review of a prospectively maintained patient database was performed from procedures in our Ambulatory Procedure Unit. All consecutive patients who underwent MFA with commercially manufactured 1% polidocanol microfoam for symptomatic superficial vein reflux between June 2018 and September 2022 were identified. Patients treated for tributary veins only, without truncal vein ablation, were excluded. Patients were then stratified into groups: complete closure (Group I) and non-closure (Group II). Preoperative demographics, procedural details, and postoperative outcomes were analyzed. Preoperative variables that were significant on univariate analysis (prior deep venous thrombosis [DVT], body mass index [BMI] ≥30 kg/m2, and vein diameter) were entered into a multivariate logistic regression model with the primary outcome being vein non-closure. RESULTS: Between June 2018 and September 2022, a total of 224 limbs underwent MFA in our ambulatory venous center. Of these, 127 limbs in 103 patients met study inclusion criteria. Truncal veins treated included the above-knee great saphenous vein (Group I: n = 89, 77% vs Group II: n = 7, 58%; P = .14), below-knee great saphenous vein (Group I: n = 7, 6% vs Group II: n = 0; P = .38), anterior accessory saphenous vein (Group I: n = 17, 15% vs Group II: n = 4, 33%; P = .12, and small saphenous vein (Group I: n = 4, 4% vs Group II: n = 1, 8%; P = .41). Complete closure (Group I) occurred in 115 limbs, and 12 limbs did not close (Group II) based on postoperative duplex ultrasound screening. The mean BMI in Group II (36.1 ± 6.4 kg/m2) was significantly greater than Group I (28.6 ± 6.1 kg/m2) (P < .001). Vein diameter of ≥10.2 mm was independently associated with truncal vein non-closure with an odds ratio of 4.8. The overall mean foam volume was 6.2 ± 2.7 ml and not different between the two cohorts (Group I: 6.2 ± 2.6 ml vs Group II: 6.3 + 3.5 ml; P = .89). Post MFA improvement in symptoms was higher in Group I (96.9%) compared with Group II (66.7%) (P = .001). The mean postoperative Venous Clinical Severity Score was also lower in Group I (8.0 ± 3.0) compared with Group II (9.9 ± 4.2) (P = .048). The overall incidences of ablation-related thrombus extension and DVT were 4.7% (n = 6) and 1.6% (n = 2), and all occurred in Group I. All were asymptomatic and resolved with anticoagulation. CONCLUSIONS: Microfoam ablation of symptomatic, refluxing truncal veins results in excellent overall closure rates and symptomatic relief. BMI ≥30 kg/m2 and increased vein diameter are associated with an increased risk of saphenous vein non-closure following MFA. Non-closure is associated with less symptomatic improvement and a lower post-procedure reduction in Venous Clinical Severity Score. Despite the incidence of ablation-related thrombus extension and DVT in this study being higher than reported rates following thermal ablation, MFA is safe for patients with early postoperative duplex ultrasound surveillance and selective short-term anticoagulation.

A Comparison of Venaseal Versus Radiofrequency Ablation Outcomes Within a Managed Care Organization.

BACKGROUND: Chronic venous insufficiency is a common medical condition that afflicts over 30 million adults in the United States. Treatment and management have changed dramatically over the past 20 years with the introduction of various endovenous therapies, including radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and cyanoacrylate closure using the Venaseal system. In this study, we explore a direct comparison of outcomes between RFA and VenaSeal conducted by a single surgeon within a managed care organization. METHODS: Between May 2020 and December 2021, there were 87 patients undergoing 97 total procedures who were treated with either VenaSeal (n = 55) or RFA (n = 42), conducted by a single surgeon within a managed care organization. Primary outcomes included successful greater saphenous vein (GSV) closure, postoperative deep vein thrombosis (DVT), embolization, saphenofemoral junction (SFJ) thrombosis, skin reaction (allergic or thrombophlebitis), or procedure-related emergency room (ER) and urgent care (UC) visits. Retrospective chart review was conducted to describe patient demographics, indications for treatment, treatment details (number of access sites and indication for treatment), as well as follow-up adjunctive vein procedures (sclerotherapy and stab phlebectomy). RESULTS: All patients had postprocedural ultrasound (US) performed within 7 days by the operating surgeon and mean overall patient follow-up from index procedure was 12 months; 2 patients were lost to follow-up due to death. All operations utilized intraoperative US, and SFJ thrombosis was not observed in any patient postprocedure. The average age of VenaSeal and RFA groups was 59.05 and 59.51 years, respectively. The average number of access sites during the procedure for VenaSeal and RFA was 1.56 and 1.20, respectively. Of the 55 VenaSeal treatments, 9.1% of patients reported postoperative skin reactions, and 9.1% of patients underwent subsequent stab phlebectomy (22 stabs on average). Of the 42 RFA treatments, 7.1% of RFA patients reported postoperative skin reactions, and 9.5% underwent subsequent stab phlebectomy (36 stabs on average). The percentage of patients who had postoperative UC or emergency department visits related to the procedure in the VenaSeal and RFA groups was 3.6% and 0%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Both VenaSeal and RFA demonstrated effective vein closure of the GSV at 12-month follow-up, with VenaSeal demonstrating continued noninferiority to RFA. Based on our data, postoperative skin reactions do not appear to be significantly higher with VenaSeal treatment, as previously reported.

Endovenous laser ablation vs phlebectomy of foot varicose veins.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes and complications of selected patients treated with endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) or ambulatory phlebectomy for foot varicose veins. METHODS: From October 2016 to February 2022, selected patients undergoing EVLA (using 1470-nm with radial-slim or bare-tip fibers) or phlebectomy of foot varicose veins for cosmetic indications were analyzed, and the outcomes were compared. Patients were classified according to the Clinical, Etiologic, Anatomical, and Pathophysiological (CEAP) classification. Anatomic criteria provided the basis for the decision to perform EVLA or phlebectomy. Clinical and ultrasound assessments were performed on postoperative days 7, 30, and 90 for visualization of the sapheno-femoral and sapheno-popliteal junctions and the deep venous system. Disease severity was graded with the Venous Clinical Severity Score (VCSS), and quality of life was measured with the Aberdeen Varicose Vein Questionnaire (AVVQ) before and after treatment. Treatment outcomes were evaluated based on changes in VCSS and AVVQ scores. The groups were also compared for procedure-related complications. Data were statistically analyzed in SPSS v. 20.0 using the χ2, Student t test, Mann-Whitney test, Wilcoxon test, and analysis of variance. The results were presented as mean (standard deviation or median (interquartile range). RESULTS: The study included 270 feet of 171 patients. Mean patient age was 52.3 (standard deviation, 13.1) years, ranging from 21 to 84 years; 133 (77.8%) were women. Of 270 feet, 113 (41.9%) were treated with EVLA and 157 (58.1%) with phlebectomy. The median preoperative CEAP class was 2 (interquartile range, 2-3) in the phlebectomy and EVLA groups, with no statistically significant difference between the groups (P = .507). Dysesthesia was the most common complication in both groups. Only transient induration was significantly different between EVLA (7.1%) and phlebectomy (0.0%) (P = .001). The two approaches had an equal impact on quality of life and disease severity. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment complications were similar in phlebectomy and EVLA and to those previously described in the literature.

Diabetes, Hypertension, and Smoking Do Not Affect Outcomes of Iliofemoral Vein Stenting for Chronic Proximal Venous Outflow Obstruction.

BACKGROUND: Diabetes, hypertension, and smoking are well-recognized risk factors for peripheral artery disease (PAD), but little is known of their impact on chronic venous insufficiency (CVI). This study evaluates these factors in patients undergoing iliac vein stenting (IVS) for CVI. METHODS: A registry of 708 patients who underwent IVS from August 2011 to June 2021 was retrospectively analyzed. Symptoms were quantified using venous clinical severity score (VCSS) and CEAP classification. Both major and minor reinterventions were recorded. Logistic regression models were used to determine the unadjusted and adjusted odds ratio of any reintervention. Log-rank test was used to assess differences in reintervention-free survival. RESULTS: The prevalence of hypertension was 51.1% (N = 362), diabetes was 23.0% (N = 163), and smoking was 22.2% (N = 157). Patients with diabetes (3.6 vs. 3.4; P = 0.062), hypertension (3.6 vs. 3.3; P < 0.001), and smoking (3.7 vs. 3.4; P = 0.003) had higher CEAP scores than those without these comorbidities. Improvement in VCSS composite scores showed no differences postoperatively (diabetes: P = 0.513; hypertension: P = 0.053; smoking: P = 0.608), at 1-year follow-up (diabetes: P = 0.666; hypertension: P = 0.681; smoking: P = 0.745), or at 5-year follow-up (diabetes: P = 0.525; hypertension: P = 0.953; smoking: P = 0.146). Diabetes (P = 0.454), smoking (P = 0.355), and hypertension (P = 0.727) were not associated with increased odds of major reintervention. Log-rank test similarly showed no differences in reintervention-free survival for major or minor reoperations between those with and without diabetes (P = 0.79), hypertension (P = 0.14), and smoking (P = 0.80). CONCLUSIONS: Diabetes, hypertension, and smoking were prevalent among CVI patients, but unlike in PAD patients, they had little to no impact on long-term outcomes or reinterventions after IVS.

Comparison of one-year outcomes and quality of life between endovenous microwave ablation and high ligation and stripping of the great saphenous vein.

INTRODUCTION: The objective of this study is to evaluate and compare the effectiveness of endovenous microwave ablation (EMA) and high ligation and strippingn (HLS) of the great saphenous vein (GSV) in the treatment of varicose veins. METHODS: We included 182 patients in each EMA and HLS groups. Follow-up outcomes included AVVQ, VCSS, chronic venous insufficiency questionnaire-14 (CIVIQ14) score, clinical recurrence rate of varicose vein treatment, and patient satisfaction during the 1-year follow-up period. RESULTS: At the 1-year follow-up, no significant difference was found in the clinical recurrence rate of varicose veins between the EMA and HLS groups (p = .75). The duration of the operation and the length of hospital stay for patients in the EMA group was shorter than that for the HLS group (p < .01). The Aberdeen Varicose Vein Questionnaire (AVVQ), Venous Clinical Severity Score (VCSS) score, and ecchymosis were lower for patients who underwent EMA surgery (p < .01). CONCLUSION: Our research results confirm that EMA improves patients' quality of life with lower limb varicose veins, with EMA showing higher patient satisfaction.

The Effect of Superficial Venous Incompetence Treatment on Combined Segmental Deep Venous Reflux.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to assess the role of treatment of superficial venous reflux (SVR) in patients with combined deep segmental venous reflux as regards clinical symptoms as well as reflux improvement of the deep veins. METHODS: We reviewed 80 patients, retrospectively selected on the inclusion criteria and having combined SVR and segmental deep venous reflux who underwent SVR ablation. The contralateral limb of 44 patients was used as a control group, asked to wear compression stockings for 3 months during day time with no surgical intervention. Duplex ultrasounds follow-up was performed at 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively. Clinical severity of venous disease was graded from C1 to C6 according to the CEAP (Clinical, Etiology, Anatomy, and Pathophysiology) classification. Duplex ultrasound was done in both supine and standing positions with non-weight-bearing of the examined limb. The venous reflux time, the venous flow volume and the peak venous flow velocity were registered. Removal of SVR was performed using either conventional surgery or radiofrequency ablation. The patient was required to wear compression stockings during the day time for the following weeks. RESULTS: During the follow-up period, all patients were improved clinically as regards pain, edema, and ulcer healing. All patients included in this study had no signs of residual SVR. Corrected deep venous segment reflux was in 36 (45%). Similar data at 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively after SVR removal. The popliteal vein reflux responded less than the femoral vein reflux did. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment of the SVR eliminates segmental deep venous reflux in a good percentage of patients regardless of the treatment modality. Also, symptoms improvement and ulcer healing were documented, and hence, more studies are recommended to evaluate this role.

Value and limitations of postoperative duplex scans after endovenous thermal ablation.

BACKGROUND: Endovenous thermal ablation (EVTA) of the lower extremity veins has risen to become the main treatment modality for symptomatic venous reflux disease. One of the main reported side effects of EVTA is recanalization. As of today, there is no clear protocol as to when follow-up duplex ultrasound scans should be performed. However, the standard for postoperative duplex after truncal ablation is within 1 week of the procedure. Our aim is to try to find whether there is a particular time period when postoperative duplex ultrasound scans should be performed to allow us to best diagnose recanalization. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 9799 procedures in 3237 patients with chronic venous insufficiency owing to great, small, and anterior accessory saphenous vein insufficiency from 2012 to 2018. We excluded 466 perforator veins. All 9799 procedures were performed using EVTA in patients who failed to respond to conservative management initially. Postoperative duplex ultrasound scans were performed within 1 week (3-7 days postoperatively). We defined a successful obliteration as lack of color flow on postoperative scan. We defined symptomatic recanalization as presence of reflux on duplex ultrasound examination in the targeted vessel at follow-up with symptom recurrence. Follow-ups were performed every 3 months in the first year and every 6 months thereafter. RESULTS: Patient ages ranged from 15 to 99 years. The median patient age at the time of the procedures was 63 years (interquartile range [IQR], 51-73 years). The median overall follow-up was 25 months (IQR, 4-56 months). The Clinical, Etiology, Anatomy, and Pathophysiology (CEAP) class of all the procedures were: C1, 21; C2, 208; C3, 3585; C4, 4680; C5, 188; and C6, 1117. There were 145 redo procedures performed after symptomatic recanalization was diagnosed in patients. CEAP class of the redo patients were: C1, 0; C2, 2; C3, 49; C4, 70; C5, 5; and C6, 19. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients underwent a redo procedure performed within the first year after the initial procedure. Conversely, there was great variability as to when redo procedures were performed. Because there is no defined pattern as to when these symptomatic occurrences arise, it may not be required to perform postoperative duplex ultrasound scans after EVTA routinely, but instead when a patient comes back with symptoms such as swelling.

Comparison of endovenous microwave ablation versus radiofrequency ablation for lower limb varicose veins.

OBJECTIVE: Endovenous microwave ablation (EMA) is a recently developed thermal ablation technique used in the treatment of lower limb varicose veins. However, its efficacy and safety have been largely understudied. In the present study, we sought to explore the clinical results of EMA and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) in treating lower limb varicose veins. METHODS: Patients who underwent EMA (n = 65) or RFA (n = 46) at our institute from September 2018 to September 2020 were included in this retrospective investigation. The clinical results and complications were evaluated at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after the procedure. The effects on disease severity and quality of life were evaluated using the venous clinical severity score and chronic venous insufficiency questionnaire (CIVIQ). RESULTS: The technical success rate was 100% for both experimental groups. Although the operative time between the two groups was comparable, the EMA technique was associated with lower direct costs (P < .001), although also with prolonged hospitalization (P < .001). We found that the use of EMA correlated with more pain at 48 hours postoperatively. Except for the visual analog scale scores, no statistically significant variations were observed in the occurrence of postoperative complications within the first 48 hours postoperatively between the EMA and RFA groups, including paresthesia, ecchymosis, induration, and phlebitis (P > .05). At 4 weeks postoperatively, significantly less pigmentation was observed in the RFA group than in the EMA group (13.04% vs 32.31%; P = .020). However, the pigmentation had resolved in all patients by 12 months postoperatively. The two groups had a reduction in the venous clinical severity scores and an increase in the CIVIQ scores after the procedure. However, the CIVIQ scores within the RFA group had increased more than had those within the EMA group (P < .05). No significant differences were found in recurrence between the two groups (EMA group, 1.54%; RFA group, 2.17%; P = .804). CONCLUSIONS: Both ablation techniques are safe and effective. RFA is associated with relatively higher treatment costs but shorter hospitalization and better quality of life improvement.

Long-term results and predictors of failure after mechanochemical endovenous ablation in the treatment of primary great saphenous vein incompetence.

BACKGROUND: Mechanochemical endovenous ablation (MOCA) was introduced to treat superficial venous insufficiency of the lower leg with less pain and haematoma. Long-term outcome is still lacking. The purpose was to report long-term outcome and to analyse possible predictors for failure. METHODS: The study was a retrospective pooled analysis of two prospective cohorts previously reported, but with prolonged long-term outcome up to 5-years follow-up. RESULTS: 163 treated legs were analysed. Mean follow-up was 5.4±0.6 years, in which 33 total failures occurred. Four procedures were partially successful. VCSS improved significantly and remained stable after 1 and 2-years, but significantly rose again after 5-years. AVVQ dropped significantly, but increased after 1 year to 4.3 and 6.1 at 5-years follow-up. CONCLUSION: MOCA was effective with minimal pain perioperative. However, anatomical success deteriorated after 1-year and showed even less results after 5-years, mainly due to partly recanalization, while clinical results were less affected. There were no clear clinical predictors for failure.

Endovenous Microwave Ablation Versus Radiofrequency Ablation for the Treatment of Lower Limb Varicose Veins.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to retrospectively compare the clinical outcomes of endovenous microwave versus radiofrequency ablation combined with foam sclerotherapy in patients with lower limb varicose veins. METHODS: We identified patients with lower limb varicose veins treated with endovenous microwave ablation or radiofrequency ablation with foam sclerotherapy between January 2018 and June 2021 at our institution. Patients were followed-up for 12 months. Clinical results, including the pre-post-Aberdeen Varicose Vein Questionnaire and post-Aberdeen Varicose Vein Questionnaire and Venous Clinical Severity Score, were compared. Complications were documented and treated accordingly. RESULTS: We included 287 cases (295 limbs total; endovenous microwave ablation + foam sclerosing agent: n = 142, 146 limbs; radiofrequency ablation + foam sclerosing agent: n = 145, 149 limbs). The operative time was shorter for endovenous microwave ablation than radiofrequency ablation (42.58 ± 15.62 min vs. 65.46 ± 24.38 min, P < 0.05); however, other procedural parameters did not differ. Furthermore, hospitalization costs for endovenous microwave ablation were lower than those for radiofrequency ablation (21,063.74 ± 850.47 yuan vs. 23,312.40 ± 1,035.86 yuan, P < 0.05). At the 12-month follow-up, the great saphenous vein closure rate was similar in both groups (endovenous microwave ablation, 97% [142/146] vs. radiofrequency ablation, 98% [146/149]; P > 0.05). Additionally, the satisfaction or incidence rates of complications were not different among the groups. In both groups, the Aberdeen Varicose Vein Questionnaire and Venous Clinical Severity Score values were significantly lower 12 months postsurgery than before surgery; however, the postoperative values did not differ. CONCLUSIONS: Endovenous microwave ablation effectively treated lower limb varicose veins, with similar short-term effects as radiofrequency ablation. Moreover, it had a shorter operative time and was less expensive than endovenous radiofrequency ablation.

Application of Femoral Nerve Block in Treating Great Saphenous Vein Insufficiency by Endovenous Radiofrequency Ablation Combined with Punctate Stripping.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of ultrasound-guided femoral nerve block (FNB) in treating great saphenous vein (GSV) insufficiency by endovenous radiofrequency ablation (EVRA) combined with punctate stripping (PS). METHODS: This was a single-center, retrospective cohort study. A total of 135 patients were divided into Group A (59 patients) and Group B (76 patients). All patients received tumescent anesthesia during the operation, and group A received an additional ultrasound-guided FNB before the procedure. Intraoperative and postoperative pain score, the volume of tumescent anesthesia solution (TAS), and other indicators were compared in two groups. RESULTS: Group A had a significantly lower intraoperative pain visual analog scale than group B (2.7 ± 1.2 vs 5.2 ± 1.5, P < 0.001). The volume of TAS in group A was significantly lower than that in group B (198 ± 26.6 ml vs 338 ± 34.7 ml, P < 0.001). Postoperative muscle strength of group A was significantly decreased compared with group B (54.2% vs 3.90%, P < 0.001); no patient had severe limitation of active movements in both groups, and all motor blocks recovered within 24 h. The incidence of skin ecchymosis in group A was lower than that in group B (18.6% vs 46.1%, P = 0.001). The operation duration of the two groups had no statistically significant difference. CONCLUSIONS: Ultrasound-guided FNB in treating GSV insufficiency by EVRA combined with PS significantly relieved intraoperative pain and reduced the dosage of TAS and the incidence of skin ecchymosis without increasing the complications of anesthesia or any other surgical complications.