Compression therapy after endovenous laser ablation: Patient compliance and impact on clinical outcome.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to investigate the impact of post-interventional compression therapy on clinical outcomes after endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) of incompetent saphenous veins. METHODS: This prospective, controlled, multicenter study in Germany involved 493 varicose vein patients followed-up for 6 months. RESULTS: Compression therapy significantly reduced symptoms compared to no compression (VCSS: 1.4 ± 1.6 vs 2.2 ± 2.2; p = .007). Post-interventional therapy duration of up to 14 days was found to be most effective for improving patient-reported disease severity (p < .001) and higher quality of life (p = .001). Patient compliance was high (82%), and non-compliance was linked to worse disease severity (VCSS 1.4 ± 1.5 vs 2.1 ± 2.3, p = .009). CONCLUSION: In conclusion, post-interventional compression therapy is beneficial by reducing symptoms and improving quality of life. High patient compliance with the therapy is observed, and non-compliance is associated with worse disease severity.

Safety of synchronous prophylactic ablation of the anterior saphenous vein in patients undergoing great saphenous vein thermal ablation- 6 months follow-up data of the SYNCHRONOUS study.

BACKGROUND: The SYNCHRONOUS-study investigates simultaneous ASV-ablation with great saphenous vein (GSV) treatment in endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) for preventing varicose vein recurrence. This sub-study examines complication rates associated with prophylactic ASV-ablation. METHODS: Among 1173 patients with refluxing GSV, 604 underwent GSV-ablation only, and 569 received additional ASV-ablation. Complication rates were compared over 6 months. RESULTS: Approximately 80% of patients were complication-free with minor bruising and dysesthesia being most common complications. After 6 months, additional prophylactic ASV-ablation did not increase the rate of complications compared to GSV-only treatment. CONCLUSION: The 6-months follow-up data suggests that prophylactic ASV-closure, alongside GSV-treatment, is safe, with similar complication rates to GSV-only EVLA.

Reflux origin of the insufficient small saphenous vein by duplex ultrasound determination and consequences for therapy considering the saphenopopliteal junction type.

OBJECTIVE: The reflux pathophysiology of the saphenofemoral junction (SFJ) of the insufficient great saphenous vein (GSV) has already been investigated and stratified. These results are still lacking for the small saphenous vein (SSV). The aim of the study was to analyze the pathophysiology of the saphenopopliteal junction (SPJ) in case of refluxing SSV. METHODS: The study included 1142 legs investigated between April 1, 2019, and February 15, 2023, with chronic venous insufficiency scheduled for endoluminal thermal ablation of the insufficient SSV. Preoperatively, a standardized duplex ultrasound assessment of the SPJ including the cranial extension of the SSV and the Giacomini vein, respectively, was performed to determine the origin of reflux. Having in mind, that the draining type according to Cavezzi is relevant to the treatment planning, after having scanned 152 legs, the protocol was extended to this feature: Cavezzi type A1 or A2 was recorded on 990 legs. RESULTS: In 984 cases (86%), saphenopopliteal reflux from the popliteal vein into the insufficient SSV was detected, and in 181 cases of these (16%), simultaneous refluxing blood from the cranial extension or Giacomini vein was found. In 119 cases (10%), reflux resulted only from the cranial extension or Giacomini vein with a competent SPJ, and in 39 cases (3%), the reflux source was diffusely from side branches and/or perforating veins. Cavezzi's junction types A1 (independent junction of SSV and muscle veins) and A2 (muscle veins join into SSV, draining together into the popliteal vein through the SPJ) were found in 65% and 35% of cases, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The insufficient SSV shows a high frequency of axial reflux from the deep into the saphenous vein with an indication for high ligation or thermal ablation at the level of the SPJ or immediately distal to the inflow of muscular veins depending on the junction type. In 14%, based on this study, we observed a competent junction of the SSV without indication for ligation or thermal destruction of the SPJ.

Recurrence types 3 years after endovenous thermal ablation in insufficient saphenofemoral junctions.

OBJECTIVE: Although many studies have demonstrated that endovenous therapies have comparable efficacy to crossectomy and stripping, few studies have been published regarding the classification and recurrence patterns of varicose veins after endovenous therapy. This study attempted to provide an objective scheme for the definition and classification of recurrence. Moreover, it describes the types and rates of recurrence after endovenous thermal ablation, as well as factors associated with recurrence. METHODS: This prospective cohort study comprised a cohort of 449 patients with saphenofemoral junction (SFJ) insufficiency who underwent endoluminal varicose vein treatment for the first time in the limb between October 2013 and January 2015. The treatments were performed by a team of three experienced phlebologists. For endovenous laser ablation, Biolitec ELVeS was used with bare, radial or radial slim fibers. Radiofrequency ablation was performed with VNUS ClosureFAST (Medtronic, Deggendorf, Germany). The patients were consecutively scheduled for 3-year follow-up examinations. Detailed ultrasound findings were collected by two experienced phlebologists who classified the observed duplex ultrasound recurrence into different recurrence types. RESULTS: Clinically relevant recurrence was found in only 5.1% of cases. Examining only the recanalizations requiring reintervention resulted in a recurrence rate of 2.6%. However, if every new varicose vein that occurred postoperatively was considered a recurrence, the resultant recurrence rate was almost 54%. Preliminarily, we defined a recurrence as newly developed varicose veins within the region of the SFJ or along the course of the former treated vein distal to the SFJ. According to this definition, we obtained a clinically relevant recurrence rate of 5.3%, thus indicating that neovascular vessels were the largest recurrence type (57.7% within the region of the SFJ and 9.9% distal to the SFJ), followed by recanalization (8.9% within the region of the SFJ and 9.4% distal to the SFJ) and a refluxing anterior accessory saphenous vein (7.5%). We also developed a modified classification of progression to better understand recurrence after treatment of chronic venous insufficiency; the scheme included method failure (recanalization), neovascularizations, and disease progression (refluxing untreated vessels and new varicose veins occurring outside the treated region). The diameter of the treated vein (P = .001) and the clinical class according to CEAP classification (P = .008) were significant predictors of recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: Endoluminal therapies are efficient methods for the treatment of varicose veins, which result in low recurrence rates after 3 years. Several factors influence the development of recurrence. This study provides a practice-oriented classification and description of recurrence with clinical relevance, through making distinctions among technical error, progression of the underlying disease and actual recurrence.

Determining the origin of superficial venous reflux in the groin with duplex ultrasound and implications for varicose vein surgery.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this paper was to describe patterns of superficial reflux in the groin with respect to the terminal valve (TV), which is located at the saphenous opening to the common femoral vein, the great saphenous vein, and its tributary veins. METHODS: This study included 2019 legs with chronic venous insufficiency that received endoluminal varicose vein treatment because of varicosities with insufficiency of the saphenofemoral junction (SFJ). In a preoperative duplex ultrasound investigation of the superficial vein system, reflux after provocation in the SFJ, great saphenous vein, cranial veins (superficial external pudendal vein, superficial epigastric vein, superficial circumflex iliac vein), and anterior and posterior accessory saphenous veins was recorded and classified on the basis of the origin of reflux. RESULTS: In 1348 legs (66.8%), the reflux had its origin exclusively in the common femoral vein. In 170 legs (8.4%), the reflux had its origin in the common femoral and cranial veins. In 430 legs (21.3%), the insufficiency was due to saphenocranial reflux only. In 71 legs (3.5%), the origin of reflux could not be determined. CONCLUSIONS: Reflux in the SFJ does not involve the TV in 24.8% of the legs, implying that routine high ligation and ablation close to the TV might be overtreatment in these patients.