The importance of deep venous reflux velocity as a determinant of outcome in patients with combined superficial and deep venous reflux treated with endovenous saphenous ablation

Clinical outcomes after treatment of incompetent saphenous vein combined with segmental popliteal vein reflux

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate whether differences exist in the quality of life changes and complication rates after treatment of incompetent saphenous vein (ISV) based on the presence of segmental popliteal vein reflux (SPVR).

METHODS

Patients who underwent treatment for ISV from July 2016 to July 2021 were included and divided into two groups: patients without deep venous reflux (DVR) and patients with SPVR. Patients with axial DVR, a history of deep vein thrombosis, a history of orthopedic surgery, previous venous treatment, and no postoperative follow-up were excluded from the study. Duplex ultrasound examination was performed preoperatively and at 6 and 12 months postoperatively.

RESULTS

The study included 233 patients (398 limbs), and 50 (64 limbs) had SPVR. Differences were not observed in gender, age, body mass index, distribution of clinical class according to Clinical-Etiology-Anatomy-Physiology classification, laterality, treatment method, and preoperative Venous Clinical Severity Score or Aberdeen Varicose Vein Questionnaire scores between the two groups with SPVR or without DVR. Furthermore, the Venous Clinical Severity Score and Aberdeen Varicose Vein Questionnaire scores at 6 and 12 months postoperatively were improved in both groups, although without significant differences. A significant difference was not observed in the rate of postoperative complications between the groups based on the presence of SPVR (1.8% vs 1.6%: P = .896). The SPVR improvement rate after ISV treatment was 25% (16/64), and patient-reported outcomes in patients combined with SPVR improved independent of treatment modality, saphenous vein treatment section, and postoperative SPVR improvement.

CONCLUSIONS

Complication rates and clinical outcomes after ISV treatment did not differ in the presence of SPVR. In patients with SPVR, after ISV treatment, quality of life improved regardless of treatment modality, saphenous vein treatment section, and postoperative SPVR improvement.

The 2023 Society for Vascular Surgery, American Venous Forum, and American Vein and Lymphatic Society clinical practice guidelines for the management of varicose veins of the lower extremities. Part II: Endorsed by the Society of Interventional Radiology and the Society for Vascular Medicine

The Society for Vascular Surgery, the American Venous Forum, and the American Vein and Lymphatic Society recently published Part I of the 2022 clinical practice guidelines on varicose veins. Recommendations were based on the latest scientific evidence researched following an independent systematic review and meta-analysis of five critical issues affecting the management of patients with lower extremity varicose veins, using the patients, interventions, comparators, and outcome system to answer critical questions. Part I discussed the role of duplex ultrasound scanning in the evaluation of varicose veins and treatment of superficial truncal reflux. Part II focuses on evidence supporting the prevention and management of varicose vein patients with compression, on treatment with drugs and nutritional supplements, on evaluation and treatment of varicose tributaries, on superficial venous aneurysms, and on the management of complications of varicose veins and their treatment. All guidelines were based on systematic reviews, and they were graded according to the level of evidence and the strength of recommendations, using the GRADE method. All ungraded Consensus Statements were supported by an extensive literature review and the unanimous agreement of an expert, multidisciplinary panel. Ungraded Good Practice Statements are recommendations that are supported only by indirect evidence. The topic, however, is usually noncontroversial and agreed upon by most stakeholders. The Implementation Remarks contain technical information that supports the implementation of specific recommendations. This comprehensive document includes a list of all recommendations (Parts I-II), ungraded consensus statements, implementation remarks, and best practice statements to aid practitioners with appropriate, up-to-date management of patients with lower extremity varicose veins.

Superficial venous procedures can be performed safely and effectively in patients with deep venous reflux

BACKGROUND

The finding of concurrent deep venous reflux (DVR) when interrogating superficial venous reflux is common and might be a marker of more severe chronic venous insufficiency. However, the safety and clinical and patient-reported outcomes for patients undergoing superficial venous treatment in the presence of DVR remains underreported. Moreover, the factors associated with the persistence and disappearance of DVR after superficial vein treatment have not been evaluated. In the present study, we sought to address these questions.

METHODS

We performed a review of the institutional vascular quality initiative database from June 2016 to June 2021. Consecutive patient limbs were identified that had undergone a superficial venous intervention and had duplex ultrasound evaluations available. These patients were divided into those with and without DVR. Those with DVR were further reviewed for anatomic details and the persistence or resolution of DVR after the procedure. The primary outcome was the venous clinical severity score (VCSS) at a follow-up >3 months. The secondary outcomes included the incidence of any postoperative deep vein thrombosis or endovenous heat-induced thrombosis, differences in patient-reported outcomes, rate of resolution of DVR, and factors associated with DVR persistence. Both univariate analysis and multivariate logistic regression were applied.

RESULTS

Of the patients who had undergone superficial venous treatment, 644 patient limbs had had DVR and 7812 had not, for a prevalence of 7.6%. The DVR group was associated with a higher burden of chronic venous insufficiency. On univariate analysis, patient limbs, both with and without DVR, had improved significantly in the VCSS at <3 months of follow-up and were not significantly different. At >3 months of follow-up, the VCSS had again improved significantly compared with the VCSS at <3 months of follow-up. However, the difference between the two groups was statistically significant at the longer interval. The magnitude of improvement in the VCSS between the two groups at the longer follow-up were similar statistically (VCSS, 3.17 ± 3.11 vs 3.03 ± 2.93; P = .739). The HASTI (heaviness, achiness, swelling, throbbing, itching) score had similarly improved significantly in both groups but remained significantly higher in the DVR group during follow-up. On multivariate logistic regression, DVR was not associated with an increased VCSS at >3 months of follow-up. No intergroup difference was found in the incidence of postoperative deep vein thrombosis or endovenous heat-induced thrombosis. Of limbs with DVR, 40.8% no longer had evidence of detectable DVR at the latest follow-up venous duplex ultrasound, and DVR limited to a single segment was more likely than DVR in multiple segments to be no longer detectable.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results have shown that superficial venous procedures are safe and effective in patients with DVR, leading to improvements in clinical and patient-reported outcomes similar to those for patients without DVR. In a large proportion of the treated limbs, especially those with DVR in a single segment, no evidence of DVR was found after superficial venous intervention. Although patients with DVR will have a higher burden of chronic venous insufficiency, they still appear to derive significant benefit from superficial venous treatment.

Popliteal vein reflux is associated with increased rates of thrombotic complications after small saphenous vein closure procedures

BACKGROUND

Venous insufficiency in the small saphenous vein (SSV) is significantly less common than venous insufficiency in the great saphenous vein; the impact of popliteal vein reflux on SSV closure procedural outcomes has yet to be studied.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was performed on 150 SSV closure procedures from 2015 to 2019. Preoperative demographic analysis was performed, after which univariate analyses were performed for postoperative occlusion rates and combined rates of endothermal heat-induced thrombus (EHIT) and endovenous foam-induced thrombus (EFIT).

RESULTS

The cohort had a mean age of 58 years, and 116 (77%) were female. Fifty-four patients had C2 disease, 76 had C3 disease, 15 had C4 disease, 1 had C5 disease, and 4 had C6 disease. Twenty-three patients (15.3%) were noted to have popliteal vein reflux on their initial venous insufficiency ultrasound study, compared with 127 (84.6%) who did not. Treatment modalities included 84 radiofrequency ablations (56.0%), 37 polidocanol endovenous microfoam (24.6%), and 29 laser ablations (19.3%). When comparing patients with popliteal vein reflux with those without, there was no significant difference in the occlusion rates at their immediate postoperative visit (99.2% vs 95.6%) or at their 6-month postoperative visit (92.1% vs 91.3%). EHIT/EFIT was noted in 4 of the 23 patients with popliteal vein reflux compared with 4 of the 127 patients without popliteal vein reflux (17.3% vs 3.1%; P = .01). All eight instances of EHIT/EFIT were classified as either arteriovenous fistula class I or II EHIT or EFIT, and all were successfully treated without progression to deep vein thrombosis.

CONCLUSIONS

The presence of popliteal vein reflux has no impact on postoperative occlusion rates at 6 months; however, it is associated with a significantly increased rate in EHIT and EFIT. Patients should be counseled on this increased risk should they undergo SSV treatment with known popliteal vein reflux.

Chronic venous insufficiency: Part 1 Pathophysiology and Clinical features

Chronic venous disease (CVD) is a commonly encountered disease in dermatology out-patient department and if untreated, may progress to chronic leg ulcer causing serious morbidity to the patient. Also, it affects the quality of life of the affected patient and contributes to the loss of work productivity. The range of clinical manifestations is myriad, ranging from asymptomatic varicose veins and pigmentation to ulceration and scarring. The awareness of spectrum of clinical presentations is required to identify, diagnose and manage CVD. Long standing cases may develop ankle joint stiffness, significant fibrosis causing fixed flexion deformity, periostitis and even, Marjolin's ulcer. Increased venous hypertension, thought to result from incompetent valve and failure of calf muscle pump, is central to the pathophysiology of the development of CVD. Tissue edema, hypoxia and subsequent fibrosis are major immediate contributing factors responsible for the clinical manifestations of CVD. Localized, chronic inflammation is now increasingly being recognized as a key player, directly responsible for stasis dermatitis and hypercoagulable state. The complete ramifications of persistent inflammation in CVD is yet to be understood and serious systemic morbidities like arterial and cardiac disease are increasingly been recognized in association with CVD.

Blood Flow Analysis of the Great Saphenous Vein in the Su-Pine Position in Clinical Manifestations of Varicose Veins of Different Severities: Application of Phase-Contrast Magnetic Resonance Imaging Data

The progression of clinical manifestations of lower-limb varicose veins remains unclear. This study investigated changes in lower-limb venous blood flow using phase-contrast magnetic resonance angiography. Data were collected on veins from 141 legs. We compared legs with and without varicose veins and related symptoms and examined varying levels of varicose vein symptom severity. Legs without varicose veins exhibited a lower absolute stroke volume (ASV, p < 0.01) and mean flux (MF, p = 0.03) for the great saphenous vein (GSV) compared with legs with symptomatic varicose veins. Legs with asymptomatic varicose veins exhibited lower MF for the GSV (p = 0.02) compared with legs with symptomatic varicose veins. Among legs with varicose veins, asymptomatic legs exhibited lower ASV (p = 0.03) and MF (p = 0.046) for the GSV compared with legs that exhibited skin changes or ulcers; however, no significant differences were observed between legs presenting with discomfort or edema and legs with skin changes or ulcers, and between legs presenting with discomfort or edema and asymptomatic legs. In conclusion, in the supine position, increased blood flow rate and blood flow volume in the GSV were associated with symptomatic varicose veins and increased symptom severity.

Comparison of Four Haemodynamic Tests that Quantify Superficial Venous Insufficiency

OBJECTIVES

Reflux assessment with ultrasound (U/S) is usually qualitative. Quantitative measurements of superficial venous insufficiency (SVI) include the venous arterial flow index (VAFI), recirculation index (RCI), venous filling index (VFI), and the postural diameter change (PDC) of the saphenous trunk. The aim was to investigate their relationship.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was an observational study performed on patients with varicose veins and hospital employees. Four haemodynamic parameters were measured in 21 legs from 16 subjects. Legs were divided into no reflux (n = 7) and reflux (n = 14). The VAFI is the U/S ratio of common femoral vein volume flow divided by the common femoral artery volume flow, performed supine. The RCI is the U/S ratio of reflux volume over antegrade volume within the saphenous trunk after calf compression, standing. The VFI is the rate of calf volume increase on dependency measured in mL/s, using air plethysmography. The PDC is the percentage reduction of the saphenous trunk diameter from standing to lying, using U/S.

RESULTS

The clinical part of the CEAP classification was: C₀ = 3, C₁ = 4, C₂ = 5, C₃ = 1, C_4a = 1, C_4b = 6, C₅ = 1. All four tests demonstrated significant differences between the two groups with minimal overlap (Mann Whitney U test): VAFI (p = .028), RCI (p < .0005), VFI (p = .001), and PDC (p = .014). Furthermore, significant correlations were observed with the tests: VAFI vs. RCI (r = .532, p = .015), VFI (r = .489, p = .025) and PDC (r = -.474, p = .030); RCI vs. VFI (r = .446, p = .043) and PDC (r = -.527, p = .014).

CONCLUSIONS

Superficial venous drainage insufficiency should not be confined to an U/S assessment of the presence of reflux, which is qualitative. Quantitative data may be provided using the VAFI, RCI, VFI, and PDC. Understanding why there are significant correlations among these parameters and the preferred objective reference test requires further work.

Patient-reported outcomes of endovenous superficial venous ablation for lower extremity swelling

Objective

To evaluate the effect of endovenous ablation in patients presenting with leg swelling.

Methods

We identified Clinical, Etiology, Anatomy, Pathophysiology (CEAP) clinical class 3 (C3) patients undergoing endovenous ablation from 21 January 2005 to 19 March 2015 with an 810-nm or 1470-nm laser. Patients were surveyed regarding the degree of edema, use of compression stockings, and satisfaction with the procedure.

Results

A total of 1634 limbs were treated by endovenous ablation for incompetent saphenous veins with or without adjunctive segmental varicose vein microphlebectomy. Of these, 528 limbs were treated for CEAP C3. The average time period from the procedure date until the survey date was 1494 days (range, 562–2795 days). Ninety-two respondents accounted for 130 ablations in 128 limbs with an average venous segmental disease score of 2.7. Ninety-seven limbs (75.8%) had reduced or resolved swelling, 29 limbs (22.6%) were unchanged, and 2 limbs (1.6%) had increased swelling. The vast majority (81%) were satisfied with their decision to have the procedure.

Conclusions

Endovenous ablation for edema secondary to superficial venous insufficiency is effective and has high patient satisfaction. Further investigation is needed regarding risk factors for immediate failure and delayed recurrence of edema.

Improvements of deep vein reflux following radiofrequency ablation for saphenous vein incompetence

Objectives

The aim of this study was to describe the changes of deep vein reflux after radiofrequency ablation for great saphenous vein incompetence.

Method

The data on 139 limbs which were treated with radiofrequency ablation for great saphenous vein incompetence were prospectively collected and reviewed.

Results

Deep vein reflux was present in 43 of 139 limbs (30.9%). There were no significant differences in the rate of successful closure, the incidence of procedure-related complications, and the improvements of symptoms and quality of life between the limbs with or without deep vein reflux. With a mean follow-up of 5.9 months, the peak reflux velocity and duration of reflux were improved in all limbs with deep vein reflux and it was completely corrected in 13 limbs (30.2%) after radiofrequency ablation.

Conclusions

The presence of deep vein reflux does not affect the treatment outcomes of radiofrequency ablation for great saphenous vein incompetence and is improved in all patients. Deep vein reflux is not a barrier to performing radiofrequency ablation.

Endovenous laser with miniphlebectomy for treatment of varicose veins and effect of different levels of laser energy on recanalization. A single center experience

Varicose veins, associated with great saphenous vein (GSV) incompetence, are traditionally treated with conventional surgery. In recent years, minimally invasive alternatives to surgical treatment such as the endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) and radiofrequency (RF) ablation have been developed with promising results. Residual varicose veins following EVLA, regress untouched, or phlebectomy or foam sclerotherapy can be concomitantly performed. The aim of the present study was to investigate the safety and efficacy of EVLA with different levels of laser energy in patients with varicose veins secondary to saphenous vein reflux. From February 2006 to August 2011, 740 EVLA, usually with concomitant miniphlebectomies, were performed in 552 patients. A total of 665 GSV, 53 small saphenous veins (SSV), and 22 both GSV and SSV were treated with EVLA under duplex USG. At 84 patients, bilateral intervention is made. In addition, miniphlebectomy was performed in 540 patients. A duplex ultrasound (US) is performed to patients preoccupying chronic venous insufficiency (with visible varicose veins, ankle edema, skin changes, or ulcer). Saphenous vein incompetence was diagnosed with saphenofemoral, saphenopopliteal, or truncal vein reflux in response to manual compression and release with patient standing. The procedures were performed under local anesthesia with light sedation or spinal anesthesia. Endovenous 980-nm diode laser source was used at a continuous mode. The mean energy applied per length of GSV during the treatment was 77.5 ± 17.0 J (range 60-100 J/cm). An US evaluation was performed at first week of the procedure. Follow-up evaluation and duplex US scanning were performed at 1 and 6 months, and at 1 and 2 years to assess treatment efficacy and adverse reactions. Average follow-up period was 32 ± 4 months (3-55 months). There were one patient with infection and two patients with thrombus extension into the femoral vein after EVLA. Overall occlusion rate was 95%. No post-procedural deep venous thrombosis or pulmonary embolism occurred. Laser energy, less than 80 J/cm, was significantly associated with increased recanalization of saphenous vein, among the other energy levels. EVLA seems a good alternative to surgery by the application of energy of not less than 80 J/cm. It is both safe and effective. It is a well-tolerated procedure with rare and relatively minor complications.

Incorporating outpatient venous procedures into a vascular surgery practice

The use of endovenous procedures to treat superficial venous reflux disease in an exclusively outpatient setting has been growing in popularity during the last decade. Incorporating outpatient venous procedures into an existing vascular surgery practice is a logical step and provides optimal patient care by using the combined expertise and knowledge of devoted vascular surgeons and dedicated supporting staff. This affords the opportunity to treat patients comprehensively and to streamline the evaluation and treatment process for patients with virtually all stages of chronic venous insufficiency. Successful establishment of an outpatient vein care clinic involves making well-informed decisions about workspace, staffing, acquisition of equipment, optimization of reimbursement, and patient recruitment. Separation of the venous practice from the arterial practice both geographically and temporally is critical to success because the clinical and operational needs of these two groups of patients are very different and because the vein practice in many situations may become so robust that it erodes physicians' participation in the arterial side of the vascular practice. In addition to favorable clinical results and increased patient demand, procedures performed on an outpatient basis can be expected to significantly increase revenues. With proper strategy and organization, an outpatient vein practice can round out the existing vascular practice and be a profitable adjunct to an already established vascular surgery practice.