Current techniques to treat pathologic perforator veins

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.

Brazilian guidelines on chronic venous disease of the Brazilian Society of Angiology and Vascular Surgery

The Brazilian Society of Angiology and Vascular Surgery has set up a committee to provide new evidence-based recommendations for patient care associated with chronic venous insufficiency. Topics were divided in five groups: 1. Classification, 2. Diagnosis, 3. Conservative or non-invasive treatment, 4. Invasive treatment and 5. Treatment of small vessels. This last series is closely related to the activities of Brazilian angiologists and vascular surgeons, who are heavily involved in the treatment of small superficial veins. These guidelines are intended to assist in clinical decision-making for attending physicians and health managers. The decision to follow a guideline recommendation should be made by the responsible physician on a case-by-case basis taking into account the patient's specific condition, as well as local resources, regulations, laws, and clinical practice recommendations.

The presence of a pathologic perforator may be predictive of central venous pathology and multilevel disease in severe chronic venous insufficiency

OBJECTIVES

The treatment of a refluxing perforator is indicated in the setting of severe chronic venous insufficiency, but there are limited data on the presence of multilevel disease in these patients. This study sought to evaluate whether the presence of a pathologic perforator is predictive of the presence of central venous pathology.

METHODS

This study was a retrospective review of the institutional Vascular Quality Initiative database. Consecutive patient limbs were identified that underwent intervention of refluxing perforators. The patients who underwent imaging, including magnetic resonance imaging or computed tomography (group A), were compared with those who did not undergo imaging (group B). The treated limbs in group A were also compared with the contralateral limbs as an internal control. Anatomical findings on imaging were analyzed by two independent investigators. The primary outcome was the presence and degree of central venous stenosis as measured by an orthogonal diameter reduction of >50% by axial imaging. Secondary outcomes included demographic and clinical differences between the two groups, frequency of central venous intervention, and duration of ulcer healing. Standard statistical analysis was performed.

RESULTS

Ninety-three patient limbs underwent treatment of a pathologic perforator, with 30 in group A and 63 in group B. The following demographic and clinical variables were higher in group A compared with group B: male sex, body mass index, deep venous thrombosis history, recent or active anticoagulation use, perforator diameter, Clinical Etiology Anatomy Pathophysiology class 4, 5, or 6, and Venous Clinical Severity Score. Radiographic analysis of group A revealed concordance of a treated pathologic perforator with an ipsilateral central venous stenosis in 53.3% of patients, and a higher frequency of common iliac vein stenosis (50% vs 21.4%, P = .024) and external iliac vein stenosis (20% vs 0%, P = .012) compared with the contralateral limbs. When separated by the left or right limb, the left limbs exhibited a greater degree of common iliac vein stenosis as compared with the contralateral limbs (50.7% ± 20.9% vs 16.3% ± 16.5%, P < .001) as well as a greater frequency of >50% common iliac vein stenosis (46.7% vs 13.3%, P = .046). The right limbs exhibited a greater frequency of >50% external iliac vein stenosis as compared with the contralateral limbs (33.3% vs 0%, P = .022).

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that patients with severe chronic venous insufficiency who undergo treatment for a pathologic perforator may have additional ipsilateral central venous pathology, supporting the presence of multilevel disease. Additional axial imaging might unmask central venous pathology and provide another option for treatment.

Complete Venous Ulceration Healing after Perforator Ablation Does Not Depend on Treatment Modality

BACKGROUND

Venous leg ulceration (VLU) represents the most advanced form of chronic venous insufficiency (CVI). Persistent VLU that fails to respond to noninvasive treatment requires a minimally invasive endovascular treatment, which may include chemical (ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy [UGFS]) and thermal ablation (endovenous laser therapy [EVLT] or radiofrequency ablation [RFA]) targeting incompetent veins. Current guidelines suggest ablation of incompetent perforating veins (IPVs) juxtaposed to active or healed VLU; however, the ideal treatment modality is unknown. We hypothesize that similar to incompetent superficial vein treatment options therapies, VLU healing will be equivalent across minimally invasive IPV treatment options.

METHODS

Using the Vascular Low Frequency Disease Consortium, adults with VLU across 11 medical centers were retrospectively reviewed (2013-2017). We included those who underwent IPV therapies. The primary outcome was complete ulcer healing over time compared with cumulative hazard curves, log-rank testing, and multivariable Cox proportional hazard regression. Secondary outcomes included number of subsequent procedures, which were compared using negative binomial regression.

RESULTS

Of the 832 adults with VLU, 158 (19%) were exclusively treated conservatively, and 232 (28%) underwent index treatment for IPV and constitute the full and final cohort. The mean age was 60 ± 14 years, 57% were men, and the mean ulcer area was 3.0 cm² (interquartile range, 1-6 cm²). Ninety-one (39%) were treated with EVLT, 127 (55%) RFA, and 14 (6%) UGFS. Patients treated with RFA were older (RFA 62 ± 14 years; EVLT 59 ± 14 years; UGFS 52 ± 9 years; P = 0.01), more likely to be men (RFA 68%, n = 86; EVLT 41%, n = 37; UGFS 64%, n = 9; P < 0.001), with a higher frequency of anticoagulation (RFA 36%, n = 46; EVLT 18%, n = 16; UGFS 14%, n = 2; P = 0.005). VLU did not significantly differ in size between groups (RFA 6.2 ± 8; EVLT 4.2 ± 5.4; UGFS 6.1 ± 8; P < 0.001). There were no differences in 1-year ulcer healing rates between groups (P = 0.18). The number of subsequent procedures did not differ by treatment modality (P = 0.47).

CONCLUSIONS

This multi-institutional retrospective study does not demonstrate any association of IPV treatment modality with differing rates of VLU healing or number of subsequent procedures.

Factors that influence venous leg ulcer healing and recurrence rate after endovenous radiofrequency ablation of incompetent saphenous vein

OBJECTIVE

Endovenous radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is one of the most popular techniques for correcting superficial vein reflux. However, the effectiveness of RFA of superficial vein reflux in patients with active or healed venous leg ulcer (VLU) is unknown. Accordingly, the objective of this study was to evaluate the healing rate, the recurrence rate, and the factors significantly associated with healing and recurrence in patients with active or healed VLU who had superficial venous reflux treated with RFA.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed all healed VLU or active VLU patients treated with RFA at the Division of Vascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand, during January 2011 to December 2017 to evaluate the rate of VLU healing and recurrence. Time to healing and time to ulcer recurrence were determined by Kaplan-Meier survival analysis. Risk factors were assessed to determine their association with VLU healing and recurrence by Cox regression survival analysis.

RESULTS

RFA of the great saphenous vein (n = 56), anterior accessory saphenous vein (n = 5), or both (n = 1) was performed on 62 limbs with active (n = 32) or healed (n = 30) VLUs. The mean age of patients was 65.4 ± 9.8 years, and 80% were female. Deep venous insufficiency was present in 10 limbs (16%). Pathologic perforating vein was found in 17 patients (27%). Concomitant ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy (UGFS) of the pathologic perforating vein was performed in 12 limbs (19%). Concomitant phlebectomy was performed in 19 limbs (31%). The median follow-up time was 753 days after RFA. VLU healed in 31% of patients at 3 months, in 56% at 6 months, and in 66% at 1 year after RFA. Concomitant UGFS of the pathologic perforating vein was the only factor significantly associated with VLU healing (hazard ratio, 2.84; 95% confidence interval, 1.07-7.55; P = .037). VLU recurrence was found in 8% of patients at 1 year, in 14% at 2 years, and in 23% at 3 years after RFA. Deep vein reflux was the only identified risk factor for VLU recurrence (hazard ratio, 3.72; 95% confidence interval, 1.05-13.21; P = .042).

CONCLUSIONS

UGFS of the pathologic perforating vein at the time of RFA of saphenous vein reflux improved VLU healing. VLU recurrence was more frequent in patients with concomitant deep vein reflux. The authors suggest performing UGFS of the pathologic perforating vein at the time of RFA to improve VLU healing and monitoring of patients with associated deep vein reflux for ulcer recurrence.