The anterior saphenous vein. Part 2. Anatomic considerations in normal and refluxing patients. Endorsed by the American Vein and Lymphatic Society, the American Venous Forum, and the International Union of Phlebology.

BACKGROUND: The term Anterior Accessory of the Great Saphenous Vein suggests this is a branch tributary vein despite this vessel's anatomic features of a truncal vein. A multisocietal group suggested to designate this the anterior saphenous vein (ASV). This study was aimed to evaluate its ultrasound anatomy in normal and varicose limbs. METHODS: The clinical anatomy of the ASV was evaluated by narrative review of the literature. Additionally, the course of the ASV was evaluated in 62 limbs with no evidence of venous disease and 62 limbs with varicosities. RESULTS: The ASV length, patterns of origin and termination are reported in both normal and patients with varicose veins. Discussion of the patterns is supported by the narrative review of the literature. CONCLUSIONS: The ASV must be considered a truncal vein and its treatment modalities should be the same that for the great and small saphenous veins rather than a tributary vein.

Distribution, course, and spatial relationships of the saphenous nerve: A 3D neuroanatomical map for nerve stimulation.

The overall objective of this study was to construct a 3D neuroanatomical map of the saphenous nerve based on cartesian coordinate data to define its course in 3D space relative to bony and soft tissue landmarks. Ten lower limb embalmed specimens were meticulously dissected, digitized, laser scanned, and modelled in 3D. The course of the main branches, number of collateral branches, and relationship of saphenous nerve to the great saphenous vein were defined and quantified using the high-fidelity 3D models. In 60% of specimens, the saphenous nerve was found to have three branches in the leg, infrapatellar, anterior, and posterior. In 40% of specimens, the posterior branch was absent. Three landmarks were found to consistently localize the anterior branch: the medial border of tibia at the level of the tibial tuberosity, the medial border of tibia at the level of the mid-point of leg, and the mid-point of the anterior border of the medial malleolus. The posterior branch, when present, had variable branching patterns but did not extend as far distally as the medial malleolus in any specimen. Anatomically, the anterior and posterior branches at the level of the tibial tuberosity could be most advantageous for nerve stimulation due to their close proximity to the bifurcation of the saphenous nerve where the branches are larger and more readily localizable than distally. Additionally, the tibial tuberosity is a prominent landmark that can be easily identified in most individuals and could be used to localize the anterior and posterior branch using ultrasound or other imaging modalities. These findings will enable implementation of highly realistic computational models that can be used to simulate saphenous nerve stimulation using percutaneous and implanted devices.

CHIVA for dummies.

BACKGROUND: Sparing the Great Saphenous Vein capital for possible arterial substitution and recurrence decrease may be an alternative to current ablation options for Varicose Veins treatment. Conservative surgery of varicose veins (CHIVA) was suggested in 1988 by Franceschi, by limited veins interruptions in strategic points. However, the method did not diffuse due to the need for high Duplex expertise to determine the procedure in every single patient. METHOD: Evaluation of the literature regarding saphenous sparing, with special reference to CHIVA. RESULT: It has been realized that basic Ultrasound expertise is sufficient for performing GSV conservation. Most of the time, only a few parameters are needed: a junction competence assessment and a re-entry perforator position. CONCLUSION: For achieving the goal of saphenous conservative treatment, a limited phlebectomy and possible Junction interruption (crossotomy) may be a simplified solution.

Lymphedema after saphenous harvesting for coronary artery bypass surgery: case report and literature review.

Different causes have been described for secondary lymphedema as reported in this article. A 75-year-old man was diagnosed with lymphedema about one decade after saphenous harvesting for coronary artery bypass surgery. It took two years for him to find out his diagnosis and receive the proper treatment. After standard complete decongestive therapy, his volume and pain decreased and his quality of life was improved, especially its physical aspect. It is important to recognize the possibility of lymphedema development after saphenous harvesting among patients undergoing coronary artery bypass surgery to prevent significant disturbance of quality of life with timely management.

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.

Effect of junctional reflux on the venous clinical severity score in patients with insufficiency of the great saphenous vein (JURY study).

OBJECTIVE: Effective treatment options are available for chronic venous insufficiency associated with superficial venous reflux. Although many patients with C2 and C3 disease based on the CEAP (Clinical-Etiological-Anatomical-Pathophysiological) classification have combined great saphenous vein (GSV) and saphenofemoral junction (SFJ) reflux, some may not have concomitant SFJ reflux. Several payors have determined that symptom severity in patients without SFJ reflux does not warrant treatment. In patients planned for venous ablation, we tested whether Venous Clinical Severity Scores (VCSS) are equivalent in those with GSV reflux alone compared with those with both GSV and SFJ reflux. METHODS: This cross-sectional study was conducted at 10 centers. Inclusion criteria were: candidate for endovenous ablation as determined by treating physician; 18 to 80 years of age; GSV reflux with or without SFJ reflux on ultrasound; and C2 or C3 disease. Exclusion criteria were prior deep vein thrombosis; prior vein ablation on the index limb; ilio-caval obstruction; and renal, hepatic, or heart failure requiring prior hospitalization. An a priori sample size was calculated. We used multiple linear regression (adjusted for patient characteristics) to compare differences in VCSS scores of the two groups at baseline, and to test whether scores were equivalent using a priori equivalence boundaries of +1 and -1. In secondary analyses, we tested differences in VCSS scores in patients with C2 and C3 disease separately. RESULTS: A total of 352 patients were enrolled; 64.2% (n = 226) had SFJ reflux, and 35.8% (n = 126) did not. The two groups did not differ by major clinical characteristics. The mean age of the cohort was 53.9 ± 14.3 years; women comprised 74.2%; White patients 85.8%; and body mass index was 27.8 ± 6.1 kg/m2. The VCSS scores in patients with and without SFJ reflux were found to be equivalent; SFJ reflux was not a significant predictor of VCSS score; and mean VCSS scores did not differ significantly (6.4 vs 6.6, respectively, P = .40). In secondary subset analyses, VCSS scores were equivalent between C2 patients with and without SFJ reflux, and VCSS scores of C3 patients with SFJ reflux were lower than those without SFJ reflux. CONCLUSIONS: Symptom severity is equivalent in patients with GSV reflux with or without SFJ reflux. The absence of SFJ reflux alone should not determine the treatment paradigm in patients with symptomatic chronic venous insufficiency. Patients with GSV reflux who meet clinical criteria for treatment should have equivalent treatment regardless of whether or not they have SFJ reflux.

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.

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.

Diagnostic Value of Lower Extremity Venous Duplication via Digital Subtraction Angiography Guided Venography.

INTRODUCTION: Lower limb venous anomalies, including duplicated veins, are common and have significant impacts on the outcomes and efficacy of venous surgery. Digital subtraction angiography (DSA) guided venography, serving as the tertiary diagnostic option for venous disorders, offers valuable informations to clinical practitioners. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted on 195 patients with suspected venous disease, evaluating 259 limbs with venography imaging. Two experienced interventional vascularists evaluated the images to determine the incidence and characteristics of variances in the femoral, popliteal, great saphenous, and small saphenous veins. Moreover, blood samples were collected to assess the safety of the venography procedure by monitoring changes in renal function. RESULT: Duplication variations were found in the lower limb veins, with the highest prevalence in the femoral vein (11.28%, 22/195), followed by the great saphenous vein (4.1%, 8/195), and the popliteal vein (1.54%, 3/195). No severe contrast agent allergies or postoperative complications were reported. No statistically significant differences were found in creatinine and urea levels pre- and post-operation for patients without duplication variations, those with duplication of the great saphenous, femoral, or popliteal vein (P < .05). CONCLUSION: DSA-guided venography is effective in identifying venous variations in lower limb disease. DFV is the most common recurrent vein, while DPV is the least. Adequate preparation ensures safety, high spatial resolution, dynamic imaging, and low tissue interference.

Impact of Graft Velocity on Saphenous Vein Graft Atherosclerosis after Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting.

PURPOSE: Saphenous vein grafts (SVGs) sometimes occur as vein graft stenosis or failure in coronary artery bypass grafting. The purpose of this study was to detect the factors affecting vein graft atherosclerosis. METHODS: We performed two analysis. In the first analysis, we enrolled 120 grafts using conventionally harvested saphenous vein graft (C-SVG) and followed-up with multiple coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA). We examined the factors that contribute to the graft atherosclerosis defined by graft failure at subsequent CCTA or substantial progression of graft stenosis (a decrease of ≥0.6 mm in diameter). In the second analysis, 66 grafts using no-touch harvested saphenous vein graft (N-SVG) were compared with those in the first analysis using C-SVG, focusing on the differences in intraoperative factors using propensity score-matched analysis. RESULTS: In the first analysis, graft atherosclerosis+ group comprised 27 grafts, which had a larger SVG diameter, lower graft velocity, and higher graft/native ratio in diameter than the graft atherosclerosis- group. In the multivariable analysis, slow graft velocity and graft/native ≥2 in diameter were independently associated with the graft atherosclerosis. In the second analysis, the N-SVG group had a much greater graft velocity than the C-SVG group. CONCLUSION: Lower graft velocity and higher graft/native ratio in diameter were associated with the graft atherosclerosis. The N-SVG group had increased graft velocity, which may contribute to prevent the graft atherosclerosis.(Trial registration: UMIN Clinical Trial Registry no. UMIN000050482. Registered 3 March 2023, retrospectively registered.).

Venous thrombosis following endovenous laser ablation with and without thromboprophylaxis.

OBJECTIVE: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) occurs infrequently after endovenous laser ablation (EVLA). The purpose of this study was to assess the incidence of VTE after EVLA with and without pharmacologic prophylaxis. METHODS: From October 2019 to March 2020, a series of consecutive patients from the prospectively maintained VEINOVA (vein occlusion with various techniques) registry was retrospectively analyzed. All the patients underwent EVLA with and without postoperative thromboprophylaxis. A 1470-nm laser wavelength with a radial fiber was used for EVLA. Concomitant phlebectomy or sclerotherapy of insufficient tributaries was allowed. Perivenous tumescence was applied with 1% Rapidocaine (lidocaine hydrochloride monohydrate; Sintetica SA). Ablation of varicose veins was performed by continuously drawing back the laser fiber at a power of 10 W, aiming for a linear endovenous energy delivery of 60 to 90 J/cm. Compression stockings were applied postoperatively, and the patients were advised to wear them for 1 week. Duplex ultrasound was performed at the 1- and 4-week follow-up visits to determine the occlusion rate and the occurrence of EHIT and VTE. RESULTS: Overall, 249 patients were identified from the registry. Of the 249 patients, 26 were omitted because of treatment of recurrent varicose veins. Finally, 223 consecutive patients with 223 legs and 227 saphenous veins (159 great saphenous veins, 49 small saphenous veins, and 19 anterior accessory saphenous veins) were included in the final analysis. Their mean age was 58.1 ± 13.8 years, and 167 patients (73.1%) were women. The clinical CEAP (clinical, etiology, anatomy, pathophysiology) classification was C2 for 11 legs (4.9%), C3 for 123 legs (55.2%), C4a or C4b for 86 legs (38.6%), and C5 to C6 for 3 legs (1.4%). Thromboprophylaxis was given to 132 patients (59.2%) for 3 days (rivaroxaban 10 mg once daily to 130 patients [98.5%] and low-molecular-weight heparin to 2 patients [1.5%]). No thromboprophylaxis was administered to 91 patients (40.8%) after EVLA. The average treatment length was 34.2 ± 19.3 cm and the average diameter was 5.0 ± 1.3 mm. At 1 week of follow-up, no thrombotic event had occurred in either group. At 4 weeks of follow-up, one case of EHIT class 2 (1.1%) and one case of pulmonary embolism (1.1%) had occurred in the group without thromboprophylaxis. In the thromboprophylaxis group, one deep vein thrombosis (0.8%) event had occurred (adjusted P = .135). At 1 and 4 weeks of follow-up, the treated varicose veins remained occluded in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Endovenous ablation of truncal varicose veins appears to be safe with a low thrombotic event rate with or without pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis. However, more data are needed before a final recommendation regarding the best thromboprophylaxis treatment option can be given.

COmpressioN following endovenous TreatmenT of Incompetent varicose veins by sclerotherapy (CONFETTI).

OBJECTIVE: The evidence for post-foam sclerotherapy compression stockings for varicose veins is limited. Thus, we examined the effects of post-procedural compression stockings on varicose vein patients undergoing foam sclerotherapy. METHODS: The CONFETTI study was a prospective, single-center, randomized controlled trial. Patients with foam sclerotherapy-suitable varicose veins were randomly assigned to the compression group (CG) or the no compression stockings group (NCG) for 7 days. The primary outcome was post-procedural pain measured on a 100-mm visual analog scale for 10 days. Secondary outcomes included clinical severity, generic and disease-specific quality of life scores, return to normal activities and/or work, occlusion rates, degree of ecchymosis, CG compliance, and complications. Patients were reviewed at 2 weeks and 6 months. RESULTS: A total of 139 patients were consented to and randomly assigned. The intention-to-treat analysis included 15 patients who did not receive the allocated intervention. Both groups had similar baseline characteristics. Of the patients, 63.3% and 55.4% returned for follow-up at 2 weeks and 6 months, respectively. Most of the veins treated were tributaries. The CG experienced significantly lower pain scores than the NCG, with median scores of 7 mm and 19 mm, respectively (Mann-Whitney U-test; P = .001). At 2 weeks, no differences were observed in ecchymosis or the time to return to normal activities or work. Both groups showed improvements in clinical severity and quality of life, and occlusion rates were comparable. The NCG experienced one deep venous thrombosis and superficial thrombophlebitis, whereas the CG experienced two superficial thrombophlebitis. CONCLUSIONS: The CONFETTI study suggests that short-term post-procedural compression stockings are beneficial for reducing post-procedure pain.

Assessing postoperative wound infection rates in ultrasound-guided microwave ablation versus conventional surgery for varicose veins.

Varicose veins are the prevalent vascular disorder that has conventionally been managed via risky postoperative wound infections and conventional surgery. While ultrasound-guided microwave ablation (UMA) has gained attention as a minimally invasive alternative, there is still a lack of research examining its comparative effectiveness. A prospective comparative investigation was undertaken in the Zhejiang region of China from January to November 2023, involving 140 patients who had received the diagnosis of primary varicose veins. An equal number of 70 patients underwent UMA and conventional surgery. Exclusion criteria for the study encompassed adult patients aged 18-65, with the exception of those who had undergone prior venous surgery, deep vein thrombosis or peripheral arterial disease. The demographical characteristics, procedural details and complication profiles of patients who developed postoperative wound infections within 30 days were analysed statistically. The outcomes demonstrated that postoperative wound infections were significantly diminished (5.7%) with UMA in comparison to conventional surgery (17.1%). In addition, the average duration of procedures and length of hospital stay for UMA patients were both reduced, although neither of these differences was found to be statistically significant (p > 0.05). Infection management, age and gender distribution of varicose veins were comparable between the two groups (p > 0.05). A significant inverse correlation was observed between the severity of varicose veins and postoperative outcomes, as determined by the regression analysis (p < 0.05). Using UMA to treat varicose veins showed promise as an alternative to conventional surgery, specifically in minimizing the incidence of postoperative wound infections. Additional research and clinical consideration are needed regarding the potential transition toward minimally invasive techniques in treatment of varicose veins, as suggested by these results.

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.

Outcomes of Cyanoacrylate Closure Versus Radiofrequency Ablation for the Treatment of Incompetent Great Saphenous Veins.

BACKGROUND: Evaluation of the efficacy and safety of cyanoacrylate closure (CAC) for treating incompetent great saphenous veins (GSVs) compared to radiofrequency ablation (RFA). METHODS: In this prospective, randomized controlled study, 248 symptomatic subjects with incompetent GSVs were assigned to either CAC or RFA. The primary end point, complete closure of the target GSV, was determined using a duplex ultrasound examination. RESULTS: In this study, 248 patients (mean age 33.64 ± 8.06 years including 71% women) were treated with either CAC (n = 128) or RFA (n = 120) between August 2018 to May 2022. As a follow-up, after a 1-month duration, the closure rates were 128/128 at the CAC and 154/158 at the RFA. At month 24, closure rates were 122/128 at CAC and 146/158 at RFA. Apart from phlebitis and pigmentation, the incidences of bruising, skin burn, and paresthesia were lower in the CAC group compared to the RFA group. The mean procedural times were shorter for CAC. The satisfaction level with the treatment was moderately higher among CAC patients than RAF patients. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that Cyanoacrylate glue closure of the GSV and RFA are effective techniques for managing primary varicose veins. Cyanoacrylate glue closure of the GSV appears to have a lower rate of complications and higher satisfaction levels, rapid return to normal activities, and improved procedure time without the need for perivenous tumescent anesthesia and postprocedure compression stockings when compared to RFA.

Contemporary management of incompetence of the small saphenous vein in the light of the recent results of the FOVELASS study.

The FOVELASS study, a randomised multicentre trial published this year by the French Society of Phlebology, confirms the technical superiority of endovenous laser over sclerosing foam in the treatment of small saphenous vein incompetence, over a 3-year follow-up. However, this study also validates the good clinical results of foam, equivalent to those of endovenous laser, already observed in other clinical studies on the great saphenous vein. Thermal ablation has therefore consolidated its leading position in the treatment of saphenous veins but depending on the anatomical configuration of the veins and the economic context, sclerosing foam, which is widely applicable, highly versatile, and cost-effective, may be an interesting alternative.