Rivaroxaban versus fondaparinux for thromboprophylaxis after endovenous laser ablation

Pharmacological Thromboprophylaxis for VTE Post-Endovenous Ablation of Varicose Veins: Network Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

Endovenous ablation has revolutionized treatment of varicose vein surgery but is associated with a risk of venous thromboembolism. There is no consensus regarding anticoagulation protocols for these patients. This network meta-analysis (NMA) aims to identify which anticoagulant is optimal in this cohort for clot prevention with minimal risk of adverse bleeding events.

METHODS

Library databases were searched for studies where patients were treated with one or more anticoagulants following endovenous ablation for varicose veins. The methodological quality of included studies was quantified using the Risk of Bias (ROB) assessment tools. Findings were reported using the meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology (MOOSE) checklist. Statistical analysis was carried out using metainsight (rpackage).

RESULTS

Observational data on just under 1500 patients prescribed post ablation anticoagulation (Rivaroxaban, Enoxaparin, Fondaparinux) were analyzed. Patient characteristics were comparable across the cohorts. 81 thrombotic and 40 minor bleeding events occurred in total. Overall rivaroxaban is found to be superior to the other agents.

CONCLUSIONS

This NMA indicates that prophylactic rivaroxaban is the highest ranked anticoagulant for thromboprophylaxis in patients post endovenous ablation for varicose veins, with a low risk of adverse bleeding. The choice whether to anticoagulate these patients is likely to remain at the discretion of the treating clinician.

Strategies to reduce rates of severe endothermal heat-induced thrombosis following radiofrequency ablation

OBJECTIVE

Endothermal heat-induced thrombosis (EHIT) is a potential complication of radiofrequency ablation (RFA). Data on effective prophylaxis of EHIT are limited. In 2018, a high-volume, single institution implemented strategies to decrease the incidence of EHIT, including a single periprocedural prophylactic dose of low-molecular-weight heparin to patients with a great saphenous vein (GSV) diameter of ≥8 mm or saphenofemoral junction (SFJ) diameter of ≥10 mm and limiting treatment to one vein per procedure. The size threshold was derived from existing literature. The study objective was to evaluate the effects of these institutional changes on thrombotic complication rates after RFA.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort control study was conducted using the Vascular Quality Initiative database. Data were collected for patients who underwent RFA with a GSV diameter of ≥8 mm or SFJ diameter of ≥10 mm from January 2015 to July 2022. The clinical end points were thrombotic complications (ie, thrombophlebitis, EHIT, deep vein thrombosis) and bleeding complications. Patient demographic and procedural variables were included in the analysis, and significant variables after univariable logistic regression were included in a multivariable logistic regression.

RESULTS

After the policy change, the overall vein center EHIT rate decreased from 2.6% to 1.5%, with a trend toward significance (P = .096). The inclusion criterion of a GSV diameter of ≥8 mm or an SFJ diameter of ≥10 mm yielded 845 patients, of whom 298 were treated before the policy change and 547 after. There was a significant reduction in the rate of EHIT classified as class ≥III (2.34 vs 0.366; P = .020) after the institutional changes. Treatment of two or more veins and an increased vein diameter were associated with an increased risk of EHIT (P = .049 and P < .001, respectively). No significant association was found between periprocedural anticoagulation and all-cause thrombotic complications or EHIT (P = .563 and P = .885, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

The institutional policy changes have led to lower rates of EHIT, with a reduction in severe EHIT rates in patients with an ≥8-mm diameter GSV or a ≥10-mm diameter SFJ treated with RFA. Of the changes implemented, restricting treatment to one vein was associated with a reduction in severe EHIT. No association was found with periprocedural low-molecular-weight heparin, although a type 2 error might have occurred. Alternative strategies to prevent thrombotic complications should be explored, such as increasing the dosage and duration of periprocedural anticoagulation, antiplatelet use, and nonpharmacologic strategies.

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.

Safety and efficacy of endovenous thermal ablation for treatment of symptomatic varicose veins during summertime

Background: Traditionally, varicose vein treatment is predominately performed during the colder seasons. However, data whether higher outdoor temperatures affect the outcome and/or complication rate of endovenous thermal ablation (ETA) for treatment of symptomatic varicose veins are missing. Patients and methods: In this observational study, the medical records of all patients who had ETA of the great saphenous vein (GSV), accessory saphenous vein (ASV), or small saphenous vein (SSV) between September 2017 and October 2020 were reviewed. Results: In total 846 ETA interventions in 679 patients with 1239 treated truncal veins and an average length of 69 cm phlebectomy were included. The highest temperature recorded on and within the first 14 days after treatment was on average 19.0°C (SD±7.2°C) with a minimum and maximum of -1°C and 35.9°C. Interventions were categorized according to the recorded temperature (<25°C n=584; 25-29.9°C n=191; and ≥30°C n=71). The occlusion rates were excellent (99-100%) across groups. Despite a significantly higher proportion of patients with obesity, personal history of superficial vein thrombosis and length of phlebectomies in the high temperature groups, no significant difference regarding days of work loss, patients' satisfaction or complications including bleeding or thromboembolic events was observed. Infections were rare (0.8%), but more frequently observed in the 25-29.9°C group (2.6%; p=0.058). No infection was observed in the ≥30°C group and pain 6 weeks after the intervention was even lower (VAS 0.5±1.0 and 0.5±1.2 vs. 0.0±0.1, p=0.008). Conclusions: Given the minimal invasive nature of ETA, our results can reassure clinicians and patients that ETA varicose vein treatment is possible and safe throughout the year, even on hot summer days. A non-significant trend to more infections was observed but was not associated with other adverse outcomes such as prolonged analgetics intake or inability to work.

Endovenous Thermal Ablation for Treatment of Symptomatic Saphenous Veins-Does the Body Weight Matter?

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to examine whether body weight may affect the effectiveness and safety of endovenous thermal ablation (ETA) for the treatment of symptomatic varicose veins.

METHODS

This retrospective single-center cohort study analyzed the outcomes and patient demographic data with a focus on the body weight of all patients who had ETA of symptomatic varicose veins between September 2017 and October 2020.

RESULTS

A total of 1178 treated truncal veins from 636 patients were analyzed. The mean ± standard deviation body mass index (BMI) was 25.5 ± 4.9. In 2.3% of cases, the patients were underweight (BMI < 18.5), 31.0% were overweight (BMI > 25), and 16.6% were obese (BMI > 30). Complete truncal occlusion was observed 1 year post intervention in 97.6-100% and patients were satisfied or very satisfied in 96.2-100% across BMI groups. Pain was low but significantly higher in the patients with obesity 6 weeks post intervention (visual analog scale 0.84 ± 1.49) and a higher infection rate was observed in the patients with obesity (n = 4/132; 3.0%). No significant association was observed between BMI and bleeding or thromboembolic events.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with obesity experienced prolonged pain and more infections after ETA, but ETA for varicose vein treatment remains effective and safe, independent of the patient's BMI.

Factors Affecting Residual Stump Length Following Endovenous Laser Ablation

Background

Current instruction for endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) recommends that the laser fibre tip should be at least 2 cm caudal to the saphenofemoral or saphenopopliteal junction. This is to reduce risk of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) whilst ensuring that the Great Saphenous Vein (GSV)/Short saphenous vein (SSV) occlusion (residual stump) is close to the SFJ/SPJ to reduce recurrence rates. Our aim was to primarily assess the effects of pre-operative junction distance of the laser fibre on stump length but also look at other factors affecting this.

Patient and Methods

This was a retrospective analysis of an electronic collected database performing EVLA of the GSV and SSV under local anaesthesia. Patients with previous venous thromboembolic events and incomplete data were excluded. Patients were reviewed at 6 weeks with venous Duplex scan to assess for the residual stump distance and DVT. Multivariable logistic regression was used to account for confounders.

Results

Between 2012 and 2018, 2341 patients underwent EVLA and complete data were available on 825 (35.2%) patients. All patients were scanned 6 weeks after procedure. Sixty-nine patients (8.4%) had flush occlusion, 3 patients (.4%) had extension into femoral or popliteal vein but not considered to be a DVT and 1 patient had a DVT. High BMI and increasing length of the pre-operative junction was associated with lower incidence of flush occlusion; higher rates of flush occlusions were noted in patients undergoing short saphenous vein (SSV) EVLT (OR 4.11, 95% CI 2.34-7.20; P < .001).

Conclusions

Consideration should be given to increase the intra-procedure laser tip junction to more than 2 cm particularly in patients undergoing SSV treatment to ensure that residual stump is sufficiently distal to SPJ and SFJ reducing risks of thrombus into the femoral or popliteal veins. Lower BMI may be associated with higher risk of this though the reasons for this are unclear.

Current state of the problem of risk assessment and prevention of venous thromboembolic complications after thermal obliteration of superficial veins

Venous thromboembolic complications (VTEO) after modern minimally invasive superficial vein interventions are an infrequent but very dramatic event. This article presents a review of the literature, covering the issues of prevalence, prognosis and pharmacological prevention of VTEO. The performed studies demonstrate that the incidence of symptomatic thrombotic complications after endovenous thermal obliteration does not exceed 0,5%, but taking into account asymptomatic thermally induced thromboses and subclinical occlusions of the muscular veins of the lower leg, this figure can exceed 10%. There is a high heterogeneity of the data, possibly due to differences in the individual risk of VTEO. The most validated tool for assessing the latter is the Caprini Scale, which has not been sufficiently studied in the surgical treatment of varicose veins. The administration of prophylactic doses of anticoagulants after thermal obliteration of saphenous veins is widely used in routine clinical practice, despite the lack of convincing evidence for the appropriateness of this approach. In recent years, the use of direct oral anticoagulants against the official instruction (off-label) has gained great popularity as an alternative to heparin. The largest evidence base has accumulated for the use of rivaroxaban 10 mg, which is associated with high efficacy and safety. Based on completed clinical trials, it is not possible to formulate unequivocal recommendations for prophylactic anticoagulant doses after thermal obliteration of superficial veins at this time. Additional studies are required to identify patients with an individually increased risk of thrombosis in whom prophylactic doses of anticoagulants may be of maximum benefit.

Chemothromboprophylaxis in varicose vein surgery. A systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Venous Thromboembolism (VTE) is a possible complication after varicose vein surgery, reported after both open and endovascular interventions. Nonetheless, there are no internationally accepted recommendations regarding postoperative VTE prevention strategies, with some authors advocating for its use, while others recommend against it. This study aims to systematically review current evidence on the efficacy and safety of chemothromboprophylactic strategies after varicose vein surgery.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A literature search was performed on the MEDLINE, Scopus, SciELO and Web of Science databases, which returned 532 studies. Ten studies were included. Data were extracted using piloted forms.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

A total of 6929 patients were included for analysis, out of which 70.4% were treated by open surgery (n=4878) and 29.6% by endovenous procedures (n=2051; 79.1% EVLA; 20.9% RFA). VTE chemothromboprophylaxis was performed in 76.3% of the patients (n=5284), from which 62.5% were treated by open surgery (n=3301) and 37.5% by endovenous interventions (n=1983). Among those treated by open surgery, reported deep venous thrombosis (DVT) rates ranged between 0-6.25%, while pulmonary embolism (PE) was reported in 0-0.07% of the cases. Regarding endovenous interventions, EHIT and DVT rates ranged between 0-2.5% and 0-0.9%, respectively, with no cases of PE described. The remaining 23.7% of the patients did not underwent VTE chemothromboprophylaxis (n=1645), with DVT and PE rates after open surgery ranging between 0-5.17% and 0-1.48%, respectively. Only one study reported thrombotic complications after endovenous interventions in this subgroup of patients, with post-operative EHIT rates of 7.3%, and no information regarding PE or DVT. Bleeding complications were higher in patients undergoing chemothromboprophylaxis (0-10.2%) when compared to those who did not (0-0.18%), and were more frequent after endovenous interventions (0-10.2% versus 0-0.75% after open surgery).

CONCLUSIONS

VTE is a possible complication after both open and endovascular varicose vein procedures, although overall VTE complications occur less frequently after endovascular interventions. There's a clear heterogeneity regarding peri and postoperative chemoprophylaxis regimens used. Further studies are required to stratify risk factors and indications for chemothromboprophylaxis after varicose vein surgery.

Rezidivraten und Form des Rezidivs nach endoluminaler Ablation der Vena saphena magna – Ein Vergleich von Laserablation (EVLA) 1470 nm, Radiofrequenz (RFITT und ClosureFast) sowie Heißdampf mit einer durchschnittlichen Nachbeobachtungszeit von 3,8 Jahren

Einleitung Erkrankungen des Venensystems, insbesondere auch die Insuffizienz der Vena saphena magna (VSM), gehören zu den häufigsten Krankheitsbildern in unserer Gesellschaft. Zur Behandlung stehen neben Krossektomie und Stripping sowie reiner Sklerosierungstherapie verschiedene endovenöse thermische Verfahren zur Verfügung, die in der vorliegenden Studie untereinander verglichen werden sollten.

Methoden Zwischen 2009 und 2013 wurde bei insgesamt 297 Patienten die insuffiziente VSM mit einer der 4 Methoden EVLA 1470 nm, ClosureFast, RFITT oder Heißdampf abladiert. Als primärer Endpunkt wurde die Rezidiv-Häufigkeit definiert. Die Nachkontrollen mit Duplexsonografie fanden 14 Tage postoperativ, 3 Monate postoperativ, nach 1 Jahr und schließlich jährlich mit einer durchschnittlichen Nachbeobachtungszeit von 3,8 Jahren und einer Follow-up-Rate von 81 % statt.

Ergebnisse Zum Zeitpunkt der letzten Nachkontrolle zeigten sich folgende anatomische Erfolgsraten der behandelten VSM: ClosureFast 95 %, EVLA 97 %, RFITT 79 % und Heißdampf 71 %. Schwerwiegende Komplikationen traten nur beim Heißdampf auf (Nekrosen an der Punktionsstelle), die Schmerzintensität lag bei allen Methoden 14 Tage postoperativ bei einem Median von 1–3 auf einer Skala von 1–10, bei den nachfolgenden Kontrollen lag der Median bei allen Methoden bei 1. Sowohl der Global Index Score (CIVIQ-Score) als auch der Venous Clinical Severity Score (VCSS) ließen sich durch alle endovenösen thermischen Methoden signifikant verbessern. In 5–12 % der Fälle trat ein Reflux der zuvor suffizienten Vena saphena magna accessoria (VSAA) auf.

Diskussion EVLA und ClosureFast sind zur Behandlung von Insuffizienzen der VSM mit hoher Erfolgsrate und vergleichbaren Ergebnissen zu Krossektomie und Stripping geeignet. Die Verfahren RFITT und Heißdampf zeigen im Vergleich signifikant niedrigere Verschlussraten und sind damit besonderen Situationen vorbehalten. Besonderes Augenmerk sollte auf das Vorhandensein einer zunächst nicht refluxiven VSAA gerichtet werden. Da sich hier eine erhöhte Rezidivrate bei dieser Vene zeigte, erscheint es sinnvoll, die VSAA primär mit zu abladieren.

Rivaroxaban for the prevention of venous thromboembolism after radiofrequency ablation of saphenous veins concomitant with miniphlebectomy, sclerotherapy, or no treatment of varicose tributaries

OBJECTIVE

To assess the efficacy and safety of once-daily 10 mg rivaroxaban for venous thromboembolism prophylaxis after ClosureFast radiofrequency ablation (RFA) of saphenous veins.

METHOD

The medical records of patients, who had a Caprini score of ≥3, underwent RFA, received prophylactic rivaroxaban for five days, and completed follow up at one month were reviewed for efficacy (a combination of endovenous heat-induced thrombosis [EHIT] grade of 2-4, any symptomatic or asymptomatic deep vein thrombosis [DVT], and symptomatic pulmonary embolism [PE]) and safety (a combination of major and clinically relevant non-major [CRNM] bleeding) outcomes.

RESULTS

The results of RFA for 248 great saphenous and 24 small saphenous veins with the concomitant miniphlebectomy (63.8%) and sclerotherapy (16.5%) were analyzed. The primary efficacy outcome occurred in 5 of 218 (2.3%; 95%CI, 1.0-5.3%) patients: three EHITs and two symptomatic DVTs. The CRNM bleeding was reported in two patients (0.9%; 95% CI, 0.2-3.3%). No difference was observed in comparison with 79 similar patients who received 40 mg of subcutaneous enoxaparin during the same time period.

CONCLUSION

Once-daily 10 mg rivaroxaban is suitable for VTE prophylaxis after RFA of saphenous veins.

Current status of endothermal heat induced thrombosis

BACKGROUND

There remain many questions regarding the pathophysiology and risk factors for endothermal heat induced thrombosis formation. Moreover, there are a paucity of data on the timing of its occurrence, and there has been no consensus regarding for its treatment. The purpose of this review is to summarize the current knowledge on the pathophysiology, risk factors and treatment strategies for endothermal heat induced thrombosis.

METHODS

The PubMed database was searched from 2001 to present for endothermal heat induced thrombosis, EHIT, deep vein thrombosis, chronic venous insufficiency, varicose veins, endovenous laser and radiofrequency ablation (treatment). All relevant articles identified by the authors mentioning endothermal heat induced thrombosis were included in this review.

RESULTS

A multitude of risk factors, several pathophysiological hypotheses and different treatment strategies are described in the literature.

CONCLUSIONS

Endothermal heat induced thrombosis is marginally understood. There remains a theoretical risk for significant venous thromboembolic complications. With the new uniform classification of EHIT (American Venous Forum), healthcare providers should continue to investigate the nature of this event.

A narrative review on the epidemiology, prevention, and treatment of venous thromboembolic events in the context of chronic venous disease

OBJECTIVE

Chronic venous disease (CVD) describes a spectrum of conditions associated with venous hypertension. The association between various CVD etiologies and the subsequent risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE), such as deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism, is a topic of considerable clinical interest. The aims of the present review were to characterize the risk of VTE according to the CVD etiology and to determine the optimal anticoagulation strategy for the treatment or prevention of VTE in patients with CVD.

METHODS

An extensive search of the available surgical and medical data was conducted in PubMed and Google Scholar. We searched for the following terms and other related terms to identify relevant studies: CVD, chronic venous insufficiency, varicose veins, post-thrombotic syndrome (PTS), anticoagulation, venous thromboembolism, and venous disease scoring systems (eg, CEAP [clinical, etiology, anatomic, pathophysiology], Villalta, Ginsberg, venous clinical severity score). The identified studies included randomized control trials, retrospective and prospective observational studies, narrative and systematic reviews, case reports, and case series that contributed to the proposed aims. The ClinicalTrials.gov database was also queried to identify any relevant ongoing clinical trials.

RESULTS

Congenital CVD carries a heightened risk of VTE, although few higher level studies are available to inform on this topic or on the appropriate anticoagulation strategies for these patients. Noncongenital CVD seems to carry a heightened risk of VTE, although few studies have adequately differentiated between primary and secondary etiologies. Varicose veins are a risk factor for primary VTE but might not be associated with an increased risk of recurrent VTE. In the hospital setting, patients with varicosities should be provided thromboprophylaxis. In the setting of varicose vein intervention, high-risk patients should be identified using risk assessment models and receive thromboprophylaxis. The risk of recurrent VTE in the setting of PTS is unclear but indefinite anticoagulation is not currently indicated. For patients with PTS, residual vein thrombosis might be an indicator of when anticoagulation can be safely stopped, although practical limitations to its application exist.

CONCLUSIONS

CVD is associated with an increased risk of VTE. Few studies have differentiated between classes of CVD using a standardized method and have assessed the efficacy of anticoagulation prophylaxis against or treatment of VTE. Additional studies are needed to determine the optimal therapy for preventing and treating VTE in patients with active concurrent CVD.

Thrombus Extension after Great Saphenous Vein Mechanochemical Ablation

BACKGROUND

The objective of this study is to examine factors associated with thrombus extension after early experience with mechanochemical ablation, which combines mechanical damage to the venous endothelium with infusion of a sclerosant.

METHODS

A retrospective review was performed of patients who underwent mechanochemical ablation to treat saphenous vein insufficiency in the thigh including the saphenofemoral junction. Data abstracted included patient demographics, procedural details, and postprocedural outcomes. Thrombus extension was determined by postprocedural duplex ultrasound and classified as flush closure with the femoral vein and any extension of thrombus into the femoral vein.

RESULTS

Seventy-three patients met inclusion criteria. The mean age of the population was 60, 17.8% were female, and the mean body mass index (BMI) was 30.7. Seven (9.6%) patients who underwent mechanochemical ablation experienced saphenous vein closure flush with the femoral vein. Eleven (15%) patients experience extension of thrombus to less than 50% of the diameter of the femoral vein and one patient experienced complete thrombosis of the femoral vein. There was no significant difference in age, sex, or comprehensive classification system for chronic venous disorders between the group with thrombus extension and the group without, with the exception of BMI. The mean BMI in the group with thrombus extension was 26.8 vs. 32 in the group without (P = 0.02). There was no significant difference between the 2 groups in sclerosant volume used, distance between catheter tip and SFJ, and mean diameter of GSV in the thigh.

CONCLUSIONS

In this cohort, the incidence of thrombus extension into the femoral vein with mechanochemical ablation was high relative to rates of thrombus extension associated with reported rates of thermal ablation. Further investigation with larger cohorts, and standardized reporting is required to characterize the true rate of thrombus extension after mechanochemical ablation and identify maneuvers which may prevent thrombus extension.

Thromboprophylaxis practice after outpatient endovenous thermal ablation

OBJECTIVE

The use of endovenous thermal ablation (ETA) for the treatment of truncal varicose veins has been increasing worldwide; however, uncertainty remains regarding the need for thromboprophylaxis and follow-up of patients undergoing this minimally invasive procedure. A nationwide survey of among physicians performing ETA was conducted to assess the thromboprophylaxis practice and follow-up protocols after ETA in Switzerland.

METHODS

A questionnaire was sent to all ETA-certified physicians (n = 193) in Switzerland. The survey covered procedure type, thromboprophylaxis (including pharmacologic and compression therapy), duplex ultrasound follow-up examinations, and the management of endovenous heat-induced thrombosis (EHIT).

RESULTS

Overall, 121 responses were received, for a response rate of 62.7%. Of the 121 respondents, 71 were vascular medicine specialists (58.7%) and 46 were general or vascular surgeons (38.0%), representing the two largest groups of specialists, followed by 2 dermatologists (1.7%) and 2 interventional radiologists (1.7%). Pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis after ETA was always used by 86 physicians (71.1%), nearly always by 8 (6.6%), frequently used by 5 (4.1%), rarely used by 21 (17.4%), and never by 1 physician (0.8%). A direct oral anticoagulant drug was the preferred type of thromboprophylaxis used by 92 physicians (77.3%). The first dose of thromboprophylaxis was mostly administered immediately after intervention by 53 physicians (53.7%). The duration of postablation thromboprophylaxis ranged from 1 to 21 days, with 7 to 10 days used by 57 physicians. Compression therapy was used by all physicians, with large variation in duration ranging from 1 to 42 days after a single ETA session and after ETA with concomitant phlebectomy. Postablation duplex ultrasonography was performed routinely by 120 respondents (99.2%), and 84 respondents (69.4%) performed two to three duplex ultrasound scans. Management of EHIT depended on the EHIT class and differed widely among the physicians.

CONCLUSIONS

Our nationwide survey on thromboprophylaxis practices after ETA of truncal varicose veins in Switzerland showed that most physicians use pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis, with a direct oral anticoagulant drug the preferred agent. However, the timing of the first dose and the duration of thromboprophylaxis varied widely among the respondents, reflecting the uncertainty in this domain owing to the absence of high-quality evidence-based guidelines.

Update of the SFMV (French society of vascular medicine) guidelines on the conditions and safety measures necessary for thermal ablation of the saphenous veins and proposals for unresolved issues

Venous insufficiency is a very common disease affecting about 25% of the French population (if we combine all stages of its progression). It is a complex disease and its aetiology has not yet been fully elucidated. Some of its causes are well known, such as valvular dysfunction, vein wall defect, and the suctioning effect common to all varicose veins. These factors are generally associated and together lead to dysfunction of one or more of the saphenous veins. Saphenous vein dysfunction is revealed by ultrasound scan, a reflux lasting more than 0.5 seconds indicating venous incompetence. The potential consequences of saphenous vein dysfunction over time include: symptoms (heaviness, swellings, restlessness, cramps, itching of the lower limbs), acute complications (superficial venous thrombosis, varicose bleeding), chronic complications (changes in skin texture and colour, stasis dermatitis, eczema, vein atresia, leg ulcer), and appearance of unaesthetic varicose veins. It is not possible to repair an incompetent saphenous vein. The only therapeutic options at present are ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy, physical removal of the vein (saphenous stripping), or its thermal ablation (by laser or radiofrequency treatment), the latter strategy having now become the gold standard as recommended by international guidelines. Recommendations concerning thermal ablation of saphenous veins were published in 2014 by the Société française de médecine vasculaire. Our society has now decided to update these recommendations, taking this opportunity to discuss unresolved issues and issues not addressed in the original guidelines. Thermal ablation of an incompetent saphenous vein consists in destroying this by means of a heating element introduced via ultrasound-guided venous puncture. The heating element comprises either a laser fibre or a radiofrequency catheter. The practitioner must provide the patient with full information about the procedure and obtain his/her consent prior to its implementation. The checklist concerning the interventional procedure issued by the HAS should be validated for each patient (see the appended document).

A meta-analysis and systematic review of venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in patients undergoing vascular surgery procedures

OBJECTIVE

Perioperative venous thromboembolism (VTE) is generally considered preventable. Whereas the non-vascular surgery literature is rich in providing data about the impact of VTE prophylaxis on VTE outcomes, vascular surgery data are relatively sparse on this topic. This study sought to evaluate the evidence for VTE prophylaxis specifically for the population of vascular surgery patients.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted in MEDLINE, Cochrane, and Embase databases in December 2018. Included were studies reporting primary and secondary outcomes for common vascular surgery procedures (open aortic operation, endovascular aneurysm repair [EVAR], peripheral artery bypass, amputation, venous reflux operation). A meta-analysis was performed comparing the patients who did not receive VTE prophylaxis and had VTE complications with patients who developed VTE despite receiving prophylaxis.

RESULTS

From 3757 uniquely identified articles, 42 publications met the criteria for inclusion in this review (1 for the category of all vascular operations, 5 for open aortic reconstructions, 2 for EVAR, 1 for open aortic surgery or EVAR, 3 for abdominal or bypass surgery, 2 for peripheral bypass surgery, 2 for amputations, 1 for vascular trauma, and 25 for surgical treatment of superficial venous disease). Five studies met the criteria for inclusion in the meta-analysis. The results demonstrated slightly lower relative risk for development of VTE among patients receiving VTE prophylaxis (relative risk, 0.70; 95% confidence interval, 0.26-1.87). After open aortic reconstruction, the risk of VTE is 13% to 18% and is not reduced by VTE prophylaxis. For EVAR patients, the risk of VTE without prophylaxis is 6%. For patients undergoing peripheral bypass surgery and not receiving therapeutic or prophylactic anticoagulation, the risk of VTE is <2%. For patients undergoing amputations, VTE prophylaxis reduces the risk of VTE. For patients undergoing surgical treatment of superficial venous disease, there is an abundance of literature exploring the utility of VTE prophylaxis, but the evidence is conflicting; some studies demonstrated a benefit, whereas others showed no reduction of VTE with prophylaxis.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, there is a paucity of literature that addresses the effectiveness of VTE prophylaxis specifically in the population of vascular surgery patients. Our meta-analysis of the literature does not demonstrate a statistically significant benefit of VTE prophylaxis among the vascular surgery patients evaluated; however, it does suggest a low incidence of VTE among patients who receive VTE prophylaxis. Clinicians should identify the patients at high risk for development of postoperative VTE as the risk-benefit ratio may favor VTE prophylaxis in a selected group of patients. Clinicians should use their judgment and established VTE risk prediction models to assess VTE risk for patients. Vascular surgeons should consider reporting VTE incidence as a secondary outcome in publications.

Perforator vein endovenous heat induced thrombosis after laser ablation of the great saphenous vein

Endovenous heat induced thrombosis at the sapheno-femoral or sapheno-popliteal junction is a well-known complication after superficial truncal vein endovenous laser ablation (EVLA). This report describes a rare thigh perforator vein thrombus propagation into the femoral vein after EVLA of the great saphenous vein.

Outcome of ClosureFAST radiofrequency ablation for large-diameter incompetent great saphenous vein

Purpose

There is limited data on the outcomes of radiofrequency ablation (RFA) for large diameter saphenous veins. This study aimed to determine whether the large-diameter great saphenous vein (GSV) affected closure rate, complications, and clinical and quality of life (QoL) improvement.

Methods

From January 2012 to September 2016, a total of 722 limbs were treated with ClosureFAST RFA in a single center. Patients were divided into 2 groups according to the vein diameter measured 3 cm below the saphenofemoral junction (group A ≤ 12 mm, group B > 12 mm). Vein closure was evaluated with duplex scan at 3–5 days, 1, 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively. The incidence of complications, improvements in symptoms (measured by the Venous Clinical Severity Score [VCSS]) and QoL (measured by the Aberdeen Varicose Vein Symptom Severity Score [AVSS]) were evaluated.

Results

Groups consisted of 663 GSVs in group A (mean diameter, 6.00 ± 1.74 mm) and 59 in group B (mean diameter, 13.17 ± 1.28 mm). Vein closure rates at 12 months were 98.9% in group A and 100% in group B (P = 0.428). There was no significant difference in the incidence of complications. Both groups showed marked improvements in the VCSS and the AVSS with no significant differences.

Conclusion

For large-diameter veins, RFA showed comparable outcomes in terms of closure rate, complications, clinical and QoL improvements.

Thromboprophylaxis for varicose vein procedures – A national survey

Background

Venous thromboembolism is rare following varicose vein ablation procedures, but uncertainty about its incidence combined with a lack of evidence-based clinical guidelines regarding thromboprophylaxis has led to debate about best practice. We conducted a national survey to investigate current practice among Irish vascular surgeons.

Methods

An anonymous online questionnaire was emailed to all members of the Irish Association of Vascular Surgeons and the Northern Ireland Vascular Society.

Results

Response rate was 60%. With regard to procedure type, 36.7% of respondents use only endovenous techniques and 53% use a combination of open and endovenous. Formal duplex imaging on all patients is obtained by 53.3%. With regard to VTE prevention, 73.3% always give thromboprophylaxis. For those who give it selectively, a variety of factors were considered as risks. Pharmacological agents used are enoxaparin in 73.3% of cases or tinzaparin, and 71.4% use a single dose (either 20/40 mg or 3500/4500 IU respectively). If patients are already taking anticoagulation, this is continued by 46.7% of respondents. Routine post procedure duplex imaging is carried out by 23.1% of recipients, either by the surgeon or formally and 80% review patients clinically. Moreover, 43.3% of respondents claim to know their post-operative VTE rate and this varies from 0 to 1% with one mortality reported.

Conclusions

The majority of respondents use single-dose thromboprophylaxis periprocedurally for varicose vein ablation procedures. VTE rates are low but the true incidence may be unknown.