Is catheter-based foam sclerotherapy more effective than direct foam sclerotherapy when combined with high ligation for the treatment of primary great saphenous vein incompetence?

Abstract

To retrospectively analyze the short-term outcomes of catheter-based versus direct foam sclerotherapy when combined with high ligation (HL) for the treatment of great saphenous vein (GSV) incompetence. From July 2018 to October 2019, a total of 82 lower limbs of 70 patients with GSV incompetence received HL combined with catheter-based foam sclerotherapy (CFS group) or direct foam sclerotherapy (DFS group) for GSV proximal trunk. Among them, 40 limbs of 36 patients were treated with CFS, and 42 limbs of 34 patients were treated with DFS. The occlusion of GSV proximal trunk was evaluated with venous duplex ultrasound examinations; Venous Clinical Severity Scores (VCSS) was used to assess clinical improvement; Aberdeen Varicose Veins Questionnaire (AVVQ) was used to assess quality-of-life scores; and Complications was used for the safety evaluation. At day 7 post-operatively, complete occlusion of proximal trunk of the GSV was achieved in 92.5% legs of the CFS group and 71.4% of the DFS group (p = 0.014). Additionally, anterograde flow was found in 7.5% legs of the CFS group and 26.2% of the DFS group (p = 0.025). No significant differences in the occurrence of complications were observed between the two groups. The median follow-up was 285.5days in the DFS group and 318days in the CFS group (p = 0.140). VCSS and AVVQ reduction were significant in both CFS group and DFS group (5.3 ± 2.5, 5.5 ± 2.4, p < 0.001 for VCSS; 15.9 ± 8.0, 16.3 ± 8.6, p < 0.001 for AVVQ), but no significant difference were observed between two groups (p = 0.655 for VCSS, p = 0.934 for AVVQ). Although the occlusion of great saphenous vein proximal trunk were different, two modalities result in similar clinical and quality-of-life improvements. DFS is a feasible alternative to CFS when combined with HL.