A systematic review of the treatment of residual below the knee venous reflux after endovenous thermal ablation of the great saphenous vein

Treatment of varicose great saphenous vein with endovenous laser alone or combined with eco-guided foam sclerotherapy: A randomized controlled trial

Objectives: This study compares Endovenous Laser Ablation (EVLA) alone versus combined with ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy (UGFS) for Great Saphenous Vein (GSV) insufficiency. Methods: Sixty patients were randomly allocated to EVLA or EVLA-UGFS groups which focused on GSV occlusion rates, complications, additional treatments, and quality of life (QoL) changes. Results: Among 55 participants, the EVLA group had higher 12-month occlusion rates (92.3% vs. 75.8%, p = 0.11). Nervous injury (NI) was rarer in EVLA-UGFS (3.4% vs. 23.1%, p = 0.04). No significant difference in other complication rates (p > 0.05). QoL improved in both groups (p < 0.001). EVLA-UGFS required more subsequent procedures (24.1% vs. 7.7%, p = 0.03). Conclusions: EVLA and EVLA-UGFS effectively treat GSV insufficiency, enhancing QoL. The combined method reduces NI risk but may require more follow-up procedures.

EndoVenous-assisted invaginated stripping of the great saphenous vein: A pilot and feasibility study

Objective: By incorporating an endovascular component into Great Saphenous Vein stripping, EndoVenous-assisted Invaginated Stripping (EVIS) aims to make the procedure minimally invasive. A study was conducted to investigate the surgical intervention. Methods: Sketches and videos were used to illustrate the technical aspects of EVIS. A prospective cohort study included 20 patients with chronic venous insufficiency (CVI). Results: EVIS is performed as a day-surgery. Technical success was 100%, and no complications were recorded. The mean operative time was 45 minutes, intraoperative pain score was 4.8, post-operative pain was 2.5, 1.8, 1.2, 0.5 at 48 hours, 1, 4, and 12 weeks, respectively. The mean blood loss was 15 mL, and the mean length of the GSV strapped was 19 cm. The follow-up duplex showed a reduction in the diameter of the residual GSV stump. Conclusions: EVIS is a combination of standard techniques that may prove valuable in managing CVI.

Clinical outcomes of nonthermal ablation, thermal ablation, and surgical stripping for varicose veins

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes of radiofrequency ablation (RFA), cyanoacrylate closure (CAC), mechanochemical ablation (MOCA), and surgical stripping (SS) for incompetent saphenous veins and to determine a suitable treatment modality for a specific clinical situation.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the data of patients with varicose veins who underwent RFA, CAC, MOCA, or SS from January 2012 to June 2023. The clinical outcomes, including postoperative complications and the Aberdeen Varicose Vein Questionnaire score, were assessed.

RESULTS

During the study period, 2866 patients with varicose veins were treated. Among them, 1670 patients (57.9%) were women. The mean age was 55.3 ± 12.9 years. RFA, CAC, MOCA, and SS were performed in 1984 (68.7%), 732 (25.4%), 78 (2.7%), and 88 (3.0%) patients, respectively. The complete target vein closure rate after RFA, CAC, and MOCA was 94.5%, 98%, and 98%, respectively. The absence of a target vein after SS was 98%. Deep vein thrombosis developed in four patients: one in the RFA group and three in CAC group. Surgical or endovenous procedure-induced thrombosis occurred in 2.3%, 4.8%, 6.4%, and 2.3% of the patients after RFA, CAC, MOCA, and SS, respectively. Phlebitis along the target vein occurred in 0.2% and 3.8% of patients after RFA and MOCA, respectively. A hypersensitivity reaction occurred in 3.7% of patients after CAC. Readmission was required for two patients who had undergone SS. Transient nerve symptoms developed in five (0.3%), zero, one (1.3%), and two (2.3%) patients after RFA, CAC, MOCA, and SS, respectively. After treatment, the Aberdeen Varicose Vein Questionnaire score improved significantly in all groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The clinical outcomes with improvement in quality of life were comparable among the different treatment modalities. The proximity of the nerve or skin to the target vein is the most important factor in selecting a suitable treatment modality.

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.

Stocking-only versus additional eccentric compression after below-the-knee truncal vein sclerotherapy: A SOVAECS prospective randomized within-person trial

OBJECTIVE

After foam sclerotherapy in the truncal saphenous vein, the clinical effects of additional eccentric compression has not yet been explored.

METHODS

Between April 2020 and February 2021, we enrolled 42 patients (84 limbs) who underwent bilateral endovenous combined therapy for great saphenous vein (GSV) reflux. Each patient received the same type of endovenous ablation in both above-the-knee GSVs (laser, radiofrequency, cyanoacrylate glue), and combined foam sclerotherapy was performed on both below-the-knee GSVs. Subsequently, we conducted a prospective randomized, single-blind, within-person study in which each patient's bilateral truncal saphenous vein of the calves underwent two different compression therapies: wearing of a regular class II compression stocking on one side (RC group) and additional eccentric compression on the other side (AC group). The primary end point was the occlusion range (score, 0-10) of the below-the-knee truncal GSV after foam sclerotherapy. The secondary outcomes were the pain score (visual analog scale score range, 0-10) of the paired limb, the required number of additional foam sclerotherapy sessions, compliance with compression therapy, and procedure-related complications.

RESULTS

For the above-the-knee GSV, endovenous laser treatment (n = 44), endovenous radiofrequency ablation (n = 14), and endovenous cyanoacrylate glue ablation (n = 26) were performed. The mean subcompression pressure of the medial calf in the supine and standing positions were 16.7 ± 2.34 mm Hg and 24.5 ± 6.6 mm Hg in the RC group and 38.5 ± 5.5 mm Hg and 45.3 ± 8.2 mm Hg in the AC group, respectively (P = .000). The secondary outcomes of pain score, number of additional foam sclerotherapy sessions, and pigmentation were not significantly different statistically between the two groups. The patient-reported satisfaction scores (range, 0-10) on compression at 24 hours postoperatively were 8.03 ± 1.9 for the AC group and 7.98 ± 1.9 for the RC group (P = .317; Wilcoxon signed ranks test). In both groups, the closure rate of the above-the-knee GSV at 1 month postoperatively was 100%. No procedure-related complications were identified within 1 month postoperatively, including no deep vein thrombosis, numbness, or skin necrosis requiring additional medical attention.

CONCLUSIONS

The 24 hours of additional eccentric compression on the truncal GSV compared with the use of a conventional knee-level stocking only did not yield any clinical advantages in terms of the occlusion range, postoperative pain, need for additional sclerotherapy, or skin pigmentation after foam sclerotherapy. The decision on which type of compression therapy to perform after foam sclerotherapy in the truncal vein should be comprehensively determined.

The 2022 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 I. Duplex Scanning and Treatment of Superficial Truncal Reflux: Endorsed by the Society for Vascular Medicine and the International Union of Phlebology

The Society for Vascular Surgery, American Venous Forum, and American Vein and Lymphatic Society collaborated to update the 2011 Society for Vascular Surgery/American Venous Forum clinical practice guidelines and provide new evidence-based recommendations on critical issues affecting the care of patients with varicose veins. Each recommendation is based on a recent, independent systematic review and meta-analysis of the diagnostic tests and treatments options for patients with lower extremity varicose veins. Part I of the guidelines includes evidence-based recommendations for the evaluation of patients with CEAP (Clinical Class, Etiology, Anatomy, Pathology) class 2 varicose vein using duplex ultrasound scanning and other diagnostic tests, open surgical treatment (ligation and stripping) vs endovenous ablation techniques, thermal vs nonthermal ablation of the superficial truncal veins, and management of incompetent perforating veins in CEAP class 2 disease. We have also made recommendations on the concomitant vs staged treatment of varicose tributaries using phlebectomy or liquid or foam sclerotherapy (with physician-compounded foam or commercially prepared polidocanol endovenous microfoam) for patients undergoing ablation of incompetent superficial truncal veins.