Venous thoracic outlet compression and the Paget-Schroetter syndrome: a review and recommendations for management.

Paget Schroetter syndrome, or effort thrombosis of the axillosubclavian venous system, is distinct from other forms of upper limb deep vein thrombosis. It occurs in younger patients and often is secondary to competitive sport, music, or strenuous occupation. If untreated, there is a higher incidence of disabling venous hypertension than was previously appreciated. Anticoagulation alone or in combination with thrombolysis leads to a high rate of rethrombosis. We have established a multidisciplinary protocol over 15 years, based on careful patient selection and a combination of lysis, decompressive surgery, and postoperative percutaneous venoplasty. During the past 10 years, a total of 232 decompression procedures have been performed. This article reviews the literature and presents the Exeter Protocol along with practical recommendations for management.

Treatment of varicose veins: the present and the future--a questionnaire survey.

INTRODUCTION: The treatment options for varicose veins have increased over the last few years. Despite a lack of randomised trials comparing the various modalities, many surgeons are changing their practice. The aim of this study was to assess the current practice of surgeons in Great Britain and Ireland. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A postal questionnaire survey was sent to surgical members of the Vascular Society of Great Britain and Ireland and the Venous Forum of The Royal Society of Medicine. Of 561 questionnaires sent, 349 were returned completed (62%). RESULTS: The types of varicose vein treatments offered by each surgeon varied widely in both NHS and private practice. The vast majority (96%) offered conventional surgery (CS) on the NHS. Foam sclerotherapy (FS) endovenous laser (EVL) and radiofrequency ablation (RF) were more likely to be offered in private practice than in NHS practice. Overall, 38% of respondents for NHS practice and 45% of respondents for private practice offered two or more modalities. Of the respondents who were not yet performing FS, EVL, or RF, 19% were considering or had undertaken training in FS, 26% in EVL and 9% in RF. When asked to consider future practice, 70% surgeons felt that surgery would remain the most commonly used treatment. This was followed by FS (17%), EVL (11%) and RF (2%). CONCLUSIONS: Over one-third of respondents are now offering more than one treatment modality for the treatment of varicose veins. Whilst there is movement towards endovascular treatments, the problem of cost has yet to be solved. At present, surgery remains the most popular modality in both the NHS and private practice; however, improved outcomes and patient preference may lead to a change in practice.

Randomised trial of flush saphenofemoral ligation for primary great saphenous varicose veins.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to assess different techniques of saphenofemoral ligation in the treatment of primary varicose veins. METHODS: One hundred and eighty-two patients (210 legs) with primary saphenofemoral junction incompetence were randomised to standard saphenofemoral ligation (transfixion with an absorbable suture) (SSL) or flush saphenofemoral ligation (oversewing with 4/0 polypropylene) (FSL). All legs underwent additional great saphenous vein stripping and multiple phlebectomies. Patients underwent assessment preoperatively, and at 6 weeks, 1 year and 2 years postoperatively with clinical examination, duplex imaging and completion of the Aberdeen Varicose Vein Symptom Severity Score (AVVSSS). RESULTS: A total of 148 patients (172 legs) attended follow-up at 2 years postoperatively. Recurrent varicose veins were visible in 30 legs (33 per cent) in the SSL group and 26 legs (32 per cent) in the FSL group (P=0.90). Neovascularisation was present in 20 groins (22 per cent) in the SSL group and 15 groins (19 per cent) in the FSL group (P=0.57). Nine cases of neovascularisation in the SSL group and five in the FSL group directly resulted in clinical recurrence (P=0.37). CONCLUSIONS: Flush ligation of the saphenofemoral junction confers no advantage over standard ligation with respect to clinical recurrence and neovascularisation. REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN20235689 (http://www.controlled-trials.com).

Randomised trial of polytetrafluoroethylene patch insertion for recurrent great saphenous varicose veins.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to assess the possible value of a polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) patch in the treatment of recurrent varicose veins. METHODS: Thirty-one patients (40 legs) with recurrent saphenofemoral junction incompetence were randomised to redo saphenofemoral ligation and great saphenous vein stripping with, or without the insertion of a PTFE patch over the ligated junction. Patients underwent assessment preoperatively, and at 6 weeks, 1 year and 2 years postoperatively with clinical examination, duplex imaging and completion of the Aberdeen Varicose Vein Symptom Severity Score (AVVSSS). RESULTS: A total of 27 patients (32 legs) attended for assessment at 6 weeks, 25 patients (30 legs) at 1 year and 27 patients (32 legs) at 2 years. At 6 weeks, seven legs (22%) had an area of cutaneous numbness; all but one had resolved by 1 year. Four legs (13%) developed a groin infection, which required antibiotics, 2 had a groin haematoma and four had a seroma, all of which resolved spontaneously. The overall complication rate was 35% (11 legs), with no statistically significant difference between the groups. Four of 16 legs without a patch and five of 16 legs with a patch developed neovascularisation at the saphenofemoral junction on duplex imaging by two years postoperatively. Two cases of neovascularisation in the patch group and one in the no patch group directly resulted in clinical recurrence (p=1.0). There was an improvement in patients' AVVSSS two years postoperatively (p<0.03), that was similar in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, insertion of a PTFE patch did not affect the rate of perioperative complications and it did not appear to contain neovascularisation.

Crossectomy and great saphenous vein stripping.

Crossectomy and stripping have been the standard of care for primary great saphenous varicose veins since the high failure rates of sclerotherapy became apparent in the 1970s. As the specialty of venous surgery has evolved, a number of clinical trials have established the optimal methods of surgical treatment, and the clinical benefit of routine stripping. Long-term trials, however, have uncovered a high recurrence rate after varicose vein surgery that approaches 70% after 10 years. There is much debate about whether this is the result of the dilatation of existing tributaries in the groin or the growth of new veins as a result of angiogenesis that follows surgical treatment and healing (neovascularisation). The addition of barrier technology to current crossectomy has the potential to improve the results of surgery in the future. In the meanwhile, new techniques are evolving to obliterate the great saphenous vein, including endovenous laser, radiofrequency ablation and foam sclerotherapy. Randomised clinical trials are urgently required to compare these new treatments against standard surgery, and they will need to focus on whether the short-term gains in reduced convalescence and morbidity are balanced by durable long-term results.

The management of short saphenous varicose veins: a survey of the members of the vascular surgical society of Great Britain and Ireland.

OBJECTIVE: The outcome of short saphenous vein surgery is often unsatisfactory and the high litigation rate reflects this. The aim of this study was to explore the current management of short saphenous varicose veins in Great Britain and Ireland. METHODS: This was a postal questionnaire survey of the surgical members of the Vascular Surgical Society of Great Britain and Ireland. Of 532 questionnaires 379 were returned (71.2%). RESULTS: There was diversity of opinion about the management of short saphenous veins. Eighty nine per cent of surgeons requested duplex imaging for all patients and over 50% arranged additional duplex marking of the saphenopopliteal junction preoperatively. Only 10.4% formally exposed and identified the popliteal vein during saphenopopliteal ligation, the majority (75.7%) dissected down the short saphenous vein to visualise the junction. The short saphenous vein was stripped routinely by 14.5% of surgeons, the majority preferring to excise a proximal segment of up to 10 cm (55.1%). Compared with long saphenous vein surgery, surgeons were generally more likely to warn patients of nerve damage but equally likely to warn of deep vein thrombosis. A small number of surgeons failed to warn patients of these complications. CONCLUSION: The variation in management of short saphenous veins may be explained by the lack of definitive clinical trials in this area.