1
|
Ricci S. CHIVA for dummies. Phlebology 2024; 39:238-244. [PMID: 38164906 DOI: 10.1177/02683555231225788] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/03/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Sparing the Great Saphenous Vein capital for possible arterial substitution and recurrence decrease may be an alternative to current ablation options for Varicose Veins treatment. Conservative surgery of varicose veins (CHIVA) was suggested in 1988 by Franceschi, by limited veins interruptions in strategic points. However, the method did not diffuse due to the need for high Duplex expertise to determine the procedure in every single patient. METHOD Evaluation of the literature regarding saphenous sparing, with special reference to CHIVA. RESULT It has been realized that basic Ultrasound expertise is sufficient for performing GSV conservation. Most of the time, only a few parameters are needed: a junction competence assessment and a re-entry perforator position. CONCLUSION For achieving the goal of saphenous conservative treatment, a limited phlebectomy and possible Junction interruption (crossotomy) may be a simplified solution.
Collapse
|
2
|
Gloviczki P, Lawrence PF, Wasan SM, Meissner MH, Almeida J, Brown KR, Bush RL, Di Iorio M, Fish J, Fukaya E, Gloviczki ML, Hingorani A, Jayaraj A, Kolluri R, Murad MH, Obi AT, Ozsvath KJ, Singh MJ, Vayuvegula S, Welch HJ. 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. J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord 2024; 12:101670. [PMID: 37652254 DOI: 10.1016/j.jvsv.2023.08.011] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/14/2023] [Accepted: 08/20/2023] [Indexed: 09/02/2023]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Peter Gloviczki
- Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Gonda Vascular Center, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN.
| | - Peter F Lawrence
- Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of California, Los Angeles, CA
| | - Suman M Wasan
- Department of Medicine, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, Rex Vascular Specialists, UNC Health, Raleigh, NC
| | - Mark H Meissner
- Division of Vascular Surgery, University of Washington, Seattle, WA
| | - Jose Almeida
- Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL
| | | | - Ruth L Bush
- John Sealy School of Medicine, University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston, TX
| | | | - John Fish
- Department of Medicine, Jobst Vascular Institute, University of Toledo, Toledo, OH
| | - Eri Fukaya
- Division of Vascular Surgery, Stanford University, Stanford, CA
| | - Monika L Gloviczki
- Department of Internal Medicine and Gonda Vascular Center, Rochester, MN
| | | | - Arjun Jayaraj
- RANE Center for Venous and Lymphatic Diseases, Jackson, MS
| | - Raghu Kolluri
- Heart and Vascular Service, OhioHealth Riverside Methodist Hospital, Columbus, OH
| | - M Hassan Murad
- Evidence Based Practice Center, Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
3
|
Scheerders ERY, van den Bos RR. Author response to: Comment on: A randomized clinical trial of isolated ambulatory phlebectomy versus saphenous thermal ablation with concomitant phlebectomy (SAPTAP Trial). Br J Surg 2023; 110:733. [PMID: 36809305 DOI: 10.1093/bjs/znad037] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/30/2023] [Accepted: 02/01/2023] [Indexed: 02/23/2023]
|