Interventions for great saphenous vein insufficiency: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Great saphenous vein insufficiency (GSVI) adversely affects the quality of life of affected individuals. Minimally invasive endo-venous ablation techniques have emerged as effective and safe treatments, despite the longstanding use of surgical interventions. We aim in our study to evaluate all the available interventions in the literature, either endo-venous or conventional approaches for the treatment of GSVI.

METHODS

A thorough search was performed across four electronic databases to identify relevant studies. A frequentist network meta-analysis (NWM) was executed on the combined data to derive network estimates pertaining to the outcomes of concern. Risk ratios (RRs) were employed as the effect size metric for binary outcomes, while mean differences (MDs) were utilized for continuous outcomes, each reported with a 95% confidence interval. The qualitative review was conducted employing the Cochrane risk of bias assessment tool 1.

RESULTS

Our NWM included 75 studies encompassing 12,196 patients. Regarding technical success rate within the first 5 years after treatment, Endo-venous Laser Ablation (EVLA) with High Ligation and Stripping (HL/S), EVLA alone, Cyanoacrylate Adhesive Injection, cryostripping, HL/S and Radiofrequency Ablation (RFA) were significantly better than Ultrasound-Guided Foam Sclerotherapy and F-care. Also, invagination stripping was inferior to all interventions. Conservative Hemodynamic Cure for Venous Insufficiency and Varicose Veins (CHIVA) demonstrated a significantly lower recurrence rate with a RR of 0.35 [0.15; 0.79] compared to RFA, but RFA was more effective in recurrence prevention than HL/S and Mechanochemical Ablation (MOCA), with a RR of 0.63 [0.41; 0.97] and 0.18 [0.03; 0.95], respectively. Endo-venous Steam Ablation (EVSA) emerged as the most effective in reducing post-intervention pain, showing a MD of -2.73 [-3.72; -1.74] compared to HL/S. In Aberdeen Varicose Vein Questionnaire outcome, our analysis favored MOCA over most studied interventions, with an MD of -6.88 [-12.43; -1.32] compared to HL/S. Safety outcomes did not significantly differ among interventions.

CONCLUSION

Our findings revealed significant variations in the technical success rates, recurrence rates, and post-intervention pain levels among different interventions. CHIVA exhibited enhanced performance in terms of lower recurrence rates, while EVSA emerged as a promising choice for mitigating post-intervention pain. Additionally, our analysis underscored the significance of patient-reported outcomes, with MOCA consistently yielding favorable results in terms of enhancing quality of life and expediting the return to regular activities.

Combination of Minimally Invasive Methods for the Treatment of Varicose Veins

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the combination of minimally invasive methods for the treatment of incompetent great saphenous vein and perforating veins.

METHODS

Between December 2019 and October 2020, F-care radiofrequency ablation combined with ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy and residual perforator ligation and concomitant microphlebectomy were adopted for all eligible patients. The clinical symptoms scores, complications, and quality of life were recorded.

RESULTS

49 patients (64 limbs) with a mean age of 63.29 ± 10.14 years, and 60.9%4 were male. The 1-year truncal closure rate was 63/64 (98.4%).1 A significant improvement in the Venous Disability Score, the Venous Segmental Disease Score, the Venous Clinical Severity Score and Chronic Venous Disease Quality of Life Questionnaire Score, at 12 months after the combination of minimally invasive treatment, were observed in the study. One patient developed intermuscular vein thrombosis that was successfully managed with rivaroxaban.

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of minimally invasive methods is a safe and effective method for the treatment of lower extremity varicose veins. Further large-scale, prospective, multi-center studies are needed to further verify the findings of this study.

Radiofrequency ablation of the great saphenous vein; does the choice of monopolar or bipolar catheters affect outcomes?

OBJECTIVES

Radiofrequency-based procedure is one of the leading methods of endovenous thermal ablation. The most fundamental difference with regards to currently available radiofrequency ablation systems is the way of electric current flow given to the vein wall; bipolar segmental and monopolar ablation. This study aimed to compare the monopolar ablation method with conventional bipolar segmental endovenous radiofrequency ablation method for the management of incompetent saphenous veins.

METHODS

Between November 2019 and November 2021, 121 patients with incompetent varicose veins who were treated either with the F-Care/monopolar (N = 49) or ClosureFast/bipolar (N = 72) were included in the study. A single extremity of each patient with isolated great saphenous vein insufficiency was enrolled. The differences between the two groups in demographic parameters, disease severity, treated veins, peri- and postoperative complications, and treatment efficacy indicators were retrospectively evaluated.

RESULTS

There was no statistically significant difference between the groups regarding demographic parameters, disease severity, and treated veins in preoperative period (p > 0,05). The average procedural time was 21.4 ± 4 minutes in the monopolar group, while it was 17.1 ± 3 minutes in the bipolar group. In both groups, the venous clinical severity scores declined significantly compared with the preoperative period, however; there was no difference between groups (p > 0,05). The occlusion rate of the saphenofemoral junction and proximal saphenous vein after 1 year was 94.1% in the bipolar group and 91.8% in the monopolar group (p = 0.4) while there was a significant difference in the occlusion rate of the shaft and distal part of the saphenous vein (93.2% in the bipolar group and 80.4% in the monopolar group, p = 0.04). Postoperative complications (bruising and skin pigmentation) were slightly higher in the bipolar group (p = 0.02, p = 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Both systems are effective in treating the venous insufficiency of the lower extremity. Monopolar system revealed a better early postoperative course with similar occlusion rate of the proximal part of saphenous vein compared with bipolar system, however; the occlusion of the lower half of the saphenous vein was significantly lower which may negatively affect long-term occlusion rates and recurrence of the disease.

Strategies and challenges in treatment of varicose veins and venous insufficiency

Patients with varicose veins can be treated with conservative or surgical approaches based on the clinical conditions and patient preferences. In the recent decade, the recommendations for managing symptomatic varicose veins have changed dramatically due to the rise of minimally invasive endovascular techniques. The literature was systematically searched on Medline without language restrictions. All papers on the treatment of varicose veins and venous insufficiency with different procedures were included and reviewed. Endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) both are same safe and effective in terms of occlusion rate, and time to return to normal activity. In comparison with RFA or EVLT, Cure conservatrice et Hemodynamique de l'Insufficience Veineuse en Ambulatoire (CHIVA) may cause more bruising and make little or no difference to rates of limb infection, superficial vein thrombosis, nerve injury, or hematoma. In terms of recurrence of varicose veins, there is little or no difference between CHIVA and stripping, RFA, or EVLT. Great saphenous vein recanalization is highest in the ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy (FS) group (51%) during 1 year of follow-up. The 2013 National Institute for Health and Care Excellence clinical guidelines recommend surgery as a third-line therapeutic option after EVLA or RFA and sclerotherapy. Although the mechanochemical endovenous ablation (MOCA) is a non-thermal, non-tumescent option and appears to be of similar efficacy to stab avulsion with no potential risk of nerve damage, the overall success rate of MOCA is lower than those of other procedures such as EVLA, RFA, or high ligation and stripping. EVLA is the most cost-effective therapeutic option, with RFA being a close second for the treatment of patients with varicose veins. Endovenous thermal ablation (EVLA or RFA) is recommended as a first-line treatment for varicose veins and has substituted the high ligation of saphenofemoral junctional reflux and stripping of varicose veins. Ultrasound-guided FS is associated with a high recurrence rate and can be used in conjunction with other procedures. MOCA and cyanoacrylate embolization appear promising, but evidence of their effectiveness is required.

Systematic review on the incidence and management of endovenous heat-induced thrombosis following endovenous thermal ablation of the great saphenous vein

OBJECTIVE

A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to determine the incidence of endovenous heat-induced thrombosis (EHIT) and evaluate its management after endovenous thermal ablation of the great saphenous vein (GSV).

METHODS

MEDLINE and Embase were searched for studies with at least 100 patients who underwent great saphenous vein endovenous thermal ablation and had duplex ultrasound follow-up within 30 days. Data were gathered on the incidence of thrombotic complications and on the management of cases of EHIT. The primary outcome for the meta-analysis was EHIT types 2 to 4 and secondary outcomes were deep venous thrombotic events (which we defined as types 2-4 EHIT plus deep vein thrombosis [DVT]), DVT, and pulmonary embolism (PE). Pooled proportions were calculated using random effects modelling.

RESULTS

We included 75 studies (23,265 patients). EHIT types 2 to 4 occurred in 1.27% of cases (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.74%-1.93%). Deep venous thrombotic events occurred in 1.59% (95% CI, 0.95%-2.4%). DVT occurred in 0.28% (95% CI, 0.18%-0.4%). Pulmonary embolism occurred in 0.11% (95% CI, 0.06%-0.18%). Of the 75 studies, 24 gave a description of the management strategy and outcomes for EHIT and there was inconsistency regarding its management. Asymmetrical funnel plots of studies that reported incidence of EHIT 2 to 4 and DVT suggest publication bias.

CONCLUSIONS

The recently published guidelines on EHIT from the Society for Vascular Surgery/American Venous Forum provide a framework to direct clinical decision-making. EHIT and other thrombotic complications occur infrequently and have a benign course.