Performance of Open and Closed Cell Laser Cut Nitinol Stents for the Treatment of Chronic Iliofemoral Venous Outflow Obstruction in Patients Treated at a Single Centre

Interventional treatment for post-thrombotic chronic venous obstruction: Progress and challenges

Chronic venous obstruction, including nonthrombotic iliac vein lesions and post-thrombotic syndrome, presents a significant burden on patients' quality of life and health care systems. Venous recanalization and stenting have emerged as promising minimally invasive approaches, yet challenges in patient selection, procedural techniques, and long-term outcomes persist. This review synthesizes current knowledge on the interventional treatment of post-thrombotic syndrome, focusing on the evolution of endovascular techniques and stenting. Patient selection criteria, procedural details, and the characteristics of dedicated venous stents are discussed. Particular emphasis is given to the role of inflow and other anatomical considerations, along with postoperative management protocols for an optimal long-term outcome.

Indications, technical aspects, and outcomes of stent placement in chronic iliofemoral venous obstruction

BACKGROUND

Iliofemoral Venous Stent Placement (IVS) has evolved to a well-established endovascular treatment modality for chronic iliofemoral venous obstruction (CIVO). Dedicated venous stents gained FDA approval in 2019 and solidified IVS as a defined intervention with clear indications, contraindications, risks, benefits, and procedural management principles. This review focuses on the indications, technical aspects and outcomes of stenting for CIVO. Other aspects pertaining to IVS are covered in manuscripts that are part of this series.

METHODS

This study conducted a literature search limited to English articles. Three search strategies were employed, and references were managed in Covidence software. Four investigators independently screened and evaluated articles, excluding meta-analyses, clinical trial protocols, and non-relevant studies. Eligible studies, focused on clinical outcomes and stent patencies, underwent thorough review.

RESULTS

The literature search yielded 1,704 studies, with 147 meeting eligibility criteria after screening and evaluation. Exclusions were based on duplicates, irrelevant content, and non-iliac vein stent placement.

CONCLUSION

Successful IVS for CIVO relies on meticulous patient selection, consistent use of IVUS during procedures, and attention to the technical details of IVS.

Review of the literature supporting international clinical practice guidelines on iliac venous stenting and their applicability to Australia and New Zealand practice

BACKGROUND

The overall goal of this report is to provide a high-level, practical approach to managing venous outflow obstruction (VOO).

METHODS

A group of vascular surgeons from Australia and New Zealand with specific interest, training, and experience in the management of VOO were surveyed to assess current local practices. The results were analyzed and areas of disagreement identified. After this, the group performed a literature review of consensus guidelines published by leading international organizations focused on the management of chronic venous disease, namely, the Society for Vascular Surgery, American Venous Forum, European Society for Vascular Surgery, American Vein and Lymphatic Society, Cardiovascular and Interventional Radiology Society of Europe, and American Heart Association. These guidelines were compared against the consensus statements obtained through the surveys to determine how they relate to Australian and New Zealand practice. In addition, selected key studies, reviews, and meta-analyses on venous stenting were discussed and added to the document. A selection of statements with >75% agreement was voted on, and barriers to the guideline's applicability were identified. The final recommendations were further reviewed and endorsed by another group of venous experts.

RESULTS

The document addresses two key areas: patient selection and technical aspects of venous stenting. Regarding patient selection, patients with clinically relevant VOO, a Clinical-Etiologic-Anatomic-Physiologic score of ≥3 or a Venous Clinical Severity Score for pain of ≥2, or both, including venous claudication, with evidence of >50% stenosis should be considered for venous stenting (Level of Recommendation Ib). Patients with chronic pelvic pain, deep dyspareunia, postcoital pain affecting their quality of life, when other causes have been ruled out, should also be considered for venous stenting (Level of Recommendation Ic). Asymptomatic patients should not be offered venous stenting (Level of Recommendation IIIc). Patients undergoing thrombus removal for acute iliofemoral deep vein thrombosis, in whom a culprit stenotic lesion of >50% has been uncovered, should be considered for venous stenting (Level of Recommendation Ib).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with VOO have been underdiagnosed and undertreated for decades; however, in recent years, interest from physicians and industry has grown substantially. International guidelines aimed at developing standards of care to avoid undertreating and overtreating patients are applicable to Australia and New Zealand practice and will serve as an educational platform for future developments.

Long Term Follow Up, Causes for Re-intervention, and Consequences for Surveillance After Stenting for Proximal Deep Vein Obstruction

OBJECTIVE

Venous stenting is performed increasingly for acute deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and post-thrombotic syndrome (PTS) with good short term patency results, but long term data are scarce. The purpose of this study was to evaluate long term outcome of stenting for acute DVT and PTS and to study causes of re-intervention.

METHODS

All patients stented for acute DVT and PTS between May 2006 and November 2021 were included retrospectively in this single centre cohort study. Patency was studied by duplex ultrasound (DUS) or computed tomography. The primary endpoint was stent patency. Re-intervention free survival was calculated using Kaplan-Meier methods. Secondary endpoints were causes of re-intervention, using the Pouncey classification system (2022). Binary logistic regression was used to calculate odds ratios for predictors of re-intervention.

RESULTS

A total of 114 patients were included, with 129 limbs involved (acute DVT n = 53; 41%), PTS n = 76; 59%). Median follow up was 2.3 years (interquartile range [IQR] 2.3) for acute DVT and 5.2 years (IQR 7.1) for PTS. Primary patency, secondary patency, and permanent occlusion were 73.5%, 98.1%, and 1.9% for acute DVT, and 63.2%, 92.1%, and 7.9% for PTS limbs. Overall, 41 limbs underwent at least one re-intervention: 14 in the acute DVT group and 27 for PTS. Most re-interventions (82.9%) were performed within the first year after stenting. Missed inflow, insufficient flow, and thrombosis despite anticoagulation were the most common causes of re-intervention. The strongest predictor for re-intervention for PTS was inflow disease (odds ratio 3.57, 95% confidence interval 1.26 - 10.13, p= .017).

CONCLUSION

Long term patency of deep venous stenting is good. Re-interventions are typically performed in the first year and are potentially preventable by improving the procedure and patient selection. Since secondary patency rates are excellent, selected patients may be considered for discharge from long term surveillance.

RETRACTED: Australian and New Zealand Society for Vascular Surgery clinical practice guidelines on venous outflow Obstruction of the femoral-iliocaval veins

BACKGROUND

The overall goal of this report is to provide a high-level, practical approach to managing venous outflow obstruction (VOO) in Australia and New Zealand.

METHODS

A group of vascular surgeons from the Australian and New Zealand Society for Vascular Surgery with specific interest, training, and experience in the management of VOO were surveyed to assess current local practice. The results were analyzed and areas of disagreement identified. Following this, the group performed a literature review of consensus guidelines published by leading international organizations focused on the management of chronic venous disease, namely the Society for Vascular Surgery, American Venous Forum, European Society for Vascular Surgery, American Vein and Lymphatic Society, Cardiovascular and Interventional Radiology Society of Europe, and American Heart Association. These guidelines were compared against the consensus statements obtained through the surveys to determine how they relate to Australian and New Zealand practice. In addition, selected key studies, reviews, and meta-analyses on venous stenting were discussed and added to the document. Finally, a selection of statements with >75% agreement was voted on, and barriers to the guideline's applicability were identified.

RESULTS

The document addresses two key areas: patient selection and technical aspects of venous stenting. Regarding patient selection, patients with a CEAP (Clinical-Etiologic-Anatomic-Physiologic) score of ≥3 or a venous clinical severity score for pain of ≥2, or both, and evidence of >50% stenosis on venography, computed tomography venography, magnetic resonance venography, and/or intravascular ultrasound should be considered for venous stenting (level of recommendation Ib) Patients undergoing thrombus removal for acute iliofemoral deep vein thrombosis, in whom a culprit stenotic lesion has been uncovered, should be considered for venous stenting (level of recommendation Ib). Patients with chronic pelvic pain, deep dyspareunia, postcoital pain affecting their quality of life, when other causes have been ruled out, should be considered for venous stenting (level of recommendation Ic). Asymptomatic patients should not be offered venous stenting (level of recommendation IIIc).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with deep VOO have been underdiagnosed and undertreated for decades; however, in recent years, interest from physicians and industry has grown substantially. The advent of simpler and safer treatment options has revolutionized its management, but, unfortunately, formal training for venous disease has not grown at the same rate. Simplifying the technology and training required can result in inconsistent outcomes. These guidelines are aimed at developing standards of care and will serve as an educational platform for future developments.

Lessons Learned With Venous Stenting: In-flow, Outflow, and Beyond

Venous stents are being used with increasing frequency, with a multitude of dedicated venous stents now well established or emerging onto the market. This review explores the multifaceted aspects of venous stenting. We discuss the history of venous stents, indications for their use, the imaging required before, during and after stenting, as well as some technical tips and tricks which we have found to be helpful in our own daily practice with a particular focus on iliofemoral venous stenting. Ultimately, this article seeks to enhance the understanding of venous stenting, offering insights into what we feel are best practices, challenges, and prospects for improved patient outcomes.