Aberdeen Varicose Vein Questionnaire Scores Research Articles

Comparative study on the effectiveness and safety of simultaneous and staged bilateral saphenous vein radiofrequency ablation

ObjectiveChronic venous insufficiency (CVI) is a common condition affecting more than one-half of the general population, with approximately 20% of cases being bilateral. The high prevalence, diagnosis, and treatment costs, along with the negative impact on patients' quality of life, underscore its significance. This study evaluates the clinical outcomes, quality-of-life effects, and postoperative complications of simultaneous and staged bilateral radiofrequency ablation (RFA) in patients with bilateral CVI in the great saphenous vein at Clinical, Etiological, Anatomical, Pathophysiological stages 2 to 4. MethodsThis retrospective study included 433 patients with bilateral CVI in the great saphenous vein at Clinical, Etiological, Anatomical, Pathophysiological stages 2 to 4, treated with RFA between January 2018 and December 2022. Patients were classified into two groups: group 1 (n = 257) underwent simultaneous bilateral RFA, and group 2 (n = 176) underwent staged bilateral RFA. Clinical outcomes and quality of life effects were evaluated using Venous Clinical Severity Score, Aberdeen Varicose Vein Questionnaire, and Visual Analog Scale scores. Demographic data, type of anesthesia, surgery durations, and postoperative complications were analyzed. ResultsBoth groups showed significant improvements in Aberdeen Varicose Vein Questionnaire and Venous Clinical Severity Score scores at 12 months postoperatively, with no significant differences between the groups in preoperative and postoperative scores. No significant difference was found in postoperative Visual Analog Scale scores. Postoperative complication rates were low and comparable. No pulmonary embolism was observed. Symptomatic deep vein thrombosis was detected in one patient from each group and treated successfully. ConclusionsSimultaneous bilateral RFA is as effective and safe as staged bilateral RFA for treating CVI, providing similar clinical outcomes and low complication rates. The simultaneous approach offers the advantage of a single treatment session, potentially improving patient satisfaction and operational efficiency. This study supports simultaneous bilateral RFA as a viable and effective option for treating bilateral CVI.

Safety and efficacy of endovenous microwave ablation for treatment of varicose veins of the lower limbs in China: A prospective registered clinical trial.

This study aimed to investigate the safety and efficacy of a new Chinese device using microwave ablation for treating symptomatic great saphenous vein (GSV) varicose veins (VVs). This prospective, single-arm, single-center, cohort study investigated the safety and efficacy of endovenous microwave ablation for the treatment of symptomatic VVs. A total of 50 patients with lower limb varicose veins were enrolled from the Hospital of Chengdu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine. The clinical outcomes and complications were assessed at 1, 6, and 12 months after the procedure. The primary outcome was the occlusion rate of GSV immediately and at 1, 6, and 12 months after the treatment. The secondary outcomes included the venous clinical severity score (VCSS), the chronic venous insufficiency questionnaire 14 items (CIVIQ-14) score, the Aberdeen varicose vein questionnaire (AVVQ) score, and the pain visual analog scale (VAS) score. This study protocol was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (ID: NCT04645771). In total, 50 limbs from 50 patients (26 female; mean age: 53.45 ± 9.78 years) were treated. A technical success rate of 100% was achieved and no serious adverse events were recorded. During the follow-up period, the occlusion rate of the major/minor saphenous vein trunk remained 100% at 1, 6, and 12 months after surgery except one patient fell off. The median 24-h VAS value was 2 (2,3). The VCSS score, CIVIQ-14 score, and AVVQ score (p < .05) at 1, 6, and 12 months improved significantly compared with the value preoperative (p < .05). EMA was safe and effective for treating varicose veins in the lower limbs, with a high rate of venous trunk occlusion and few complications, thus improving patients' postoperative quality of life.

Comparison of one-year outcomes and quality of life between radiofrequency ablation and microwave ablation in the treatment of lower extremity varicose veins: A retrospective cohort study.

This study compared the outcomes of radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and microwave ablation (EMA) for treating lower limb varicose veins. Patients who underwent RFA (n = 240) or EMA (n = 209) at our institute from December 2020 to August 2022 were included in this retrospective investigation. Follow-up outcomes included active vein occlusion rate, Venous Clinical Severity Score (VCSS), the Aberdeen Varicose Vein Questionnaire (AVVQ), and Chronic Insufficiency Venous Quality of Life questionnaire-14 (CIVIQ-14)score. There was no significant difference in the active vein occlusion rate between the two groups after the operation (p > .05). Compared to pre-surgery scores, both groups showed substantial improvement in VCSS, AVVQ, and CIVIQ-14 scores(p < .05), there was no significant difference in these scores in either group (p > .05). Intravenous radiofrequency and microwave ablation effectively improve the quality of life for patients with lower limb varicose veins, with low post-operative complication and recurrence rates.

Ten-year outcomes of a randomized clinical trial of endothermal ablation versus conventional surgery for great saphenous varicose veins.

Surgical ligation and stripping (surgery) and endothermal ablation are both effective treatments for varicose veins, improving quality of life (QoL) up to 5 years. Few data are available on long-term outcomes. The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcomes 10 years after interventions in an RCT. Previously this RCT demonstrated that endothermal ablation is associated with superior postprocedural QoL, more rapid recovery, and lower rates of early clinical recurrence. This analysis reports outcomes at 10 years. Patients with symptomatic varicose veins owing to unilateral great saphenous vein reflux were randomized to either surgery or endovenous laser ablation (EVLA). Outcomes at 10 years included clinical recurrence and QoL. Data were obtained for 206 of 280 patients (73.6%) at 10 years. Both groups retained significant QoL improvement compared with pretreatment levels (Aberdeen Varicose Vein Questionnaire (AVVQ), Short Form 36 (SF-36®), and EQ-5D™; P < 0.001). Clinical disease progression from baseline was observed in only 10.7% of patients. The clinical recurrence rate was lower in the EVLA group (37 versus 59%; P = 0.005). The number needed to treat with EVLA to avoid one clinical recurrence within 10 years was five. This was associated with significantly higher (better) generic QoL scores with EVLA in several SF-36® domains, including bodily pain (median 84 (i.q.r. 51-100) versus 62 (41-84); P = 0.009) and general health (77 (62-87) versus 67 (52-82); P = 0.017). AVVQ scores in the EVLA group were also lower (better) (3.1 (0-7.7) versus 6.3 (0.7-13.3); P = 0.029). Both surgery and endothermal ablation are effective treatments for varicose veins at 10 years, with durable improvement in QoL and a very low rate of disease progression. However, endothermal ablation was associated with superior clinical and QoL outcomes. Registration number: NCT00759434 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).

Clinical outcomes after treatment of incompetent saphenous vein combined with segmental popliteal vein reflux

ObjectiveThis study aimed to evaluate whether differences exist in the quality of life changes and complication rates after treatment of incompetent saphenous vein (ISV) based on the presence of segmental popliteal vein reflux (SPVR). MethodsPatients who underwent treatment for ISV from July 2016 to July 2021 were included and divided into two groups: patients without deep venous reflux (DVR) and patients with SPVR. Patients with axial DVR, a history of deep vein thrombosis, a history of orthopedic surgery, previous venous treatment, and no postoperative follow-up were excluded from the study. Duplex ultrasound examination was performed preoperatively and at 6 and 12 months postoperatively. ResultsThe study included 233 patients (398 limbs), and 50 (64 limbs) had SPVR. Differences were not observed in gender, age, body mass index, distribution of clinical class according to Clinical-Etiology-Anatomy-Physiology classification, laterality, treatment method, and preoperative Venous Clinical Severity Score or Aberdeen Varicose Vein Questionnaire scores between the two groups with SPVR or without DVR. Furthermore, the Venous Clinical Severity Score and Aberdeen Varicose Vein Questionnaire scores at 6 and 12 months postoperatively were improved in both groups, although without significant differences. A significant difference was not observed in the rate of postoperative complications between the groups based on the presence of SPVR (1.8% vs 1.6%: P = .896). The SPVR improvement rate after ISV treatment was 25% (16/64), and patient-reported outcomes in patients combined with SPVR improved independent of treatment modality, saphenous vein treatment section, and postoperative SPVR improvement. ConclusionsComplication rates and clinical outcomes after ISV treatment did not differ in the presence of SPVR. In patients with SPVR, after ISV treatment, quality of life improved regardless of treatment modality, saphenous vein treatment section, and postoperative SPVR improvement.

Clinical outcomes of nonthermal ablation, thermal ablation, and surgical stripping for varicose veins

ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes of radiofrequency ablation (RFA), cyanoacrylate closure (CAC), mechanochemical ablation (MOCA), and surgical stripping (SS) for incompetent saphenous veins and to determine a suitable treatment modality for a specific clinical situation. MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed the data of patients with varicose veins who underwent RFA, CAC, MOCA, or SS from January 2012 to June 2023. The clinical outcomes, including postoperative complications and the Aberdeen Varicose Vein Questionnaire score, were assessed. ResultsDuring the study period, 2866 patients with varicose veins were treated. Among them, 1670 patients (57.9%) were women. The mean age was 55.3 ± 12.9 years. RFA, CAC, MOCA, and SS were performed in 1984 (68.7%), 732 (25.4%), 78 (2.7%), and 88 (3.0%) patients, respectively. The complete target vein closure rate after RFA, CAC, and MOCA was 94.5%, 98%, and 98%, respectively. The absence of a target vein after SS was 98%. Deep vein thrombosis developed in four patients: one in the RFA group and three in CAC group. Surgical or endovenous procedure-induced thrombosis occurred in 2.3%, 4.8%, 6.4%, and 2.3% of the patients after RFA, CAC, MOCA, and SS, respectively. Phlebitis along the target vein occurred in 0.2% and 3.8% of patients after RFA and MOCA, respectively. A hypersensitivity reaction occurred in 3.7% of patients after CAC. Readmission was required for two patients who had undergone SS. Transient nerve symptoms developed in five (0.3%), zero, one (1.3%), and two (2.3%) patients after RFA, CAC, MOCA, and SS, respectively. After treatment, the Aberdeen Varicose Vein Questionnaire score improved significantly in all groups. ConclusionsThe clinical outcomes with improvement in quality of life were comparable among the different treatment modalities. The proximity of the nerve or skin to the target vein is the most important factor in selecting a suitable treatment modality.

Endovenous laser ablation vs phlebectomy of foot varicose veins

ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to compare the outcomes and complications of selected patients treated with endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) or ambulatory phlebectomy for foot varicose veins. MethodsFrom October 2016 to February 2022, selected patients undergoing EVLA (using 1470-nm with radial-slim or bare-tip fibers) or phlebectomy of foot varicose veins for cosmetic indications were analyzed, and the outcomes were compared. Patients were classified according to the Clinical, Etiologic, Anatomical, and Pathophysiological (CEAP) classification. Anatomic criteria provided the basis for the decision to perform EVLA or phlebectomy. Clinical and ultrasound assessments were performed on postoperative days 7, 30, and 90 for visualization of the sapheno-femoral and sapheno-popliteal junctions and the deep venous system. Disease severity was graded with the Venous Clinical Severity Score (VCSS), and quality of life was measured with the Aberdeen Varicose Vein Questionnaire (AVVQ) before and after treatment. Treatment outcomes were evaluated based on changes in VCSS and AVVQ scores. The groups were also compared for procedure-related complications. Data were statistically analyzed in SPSS v. 20.0 using the χ2, Student t test, Mann-Whitney test, Wilcoxon test, and analysis of variance. The results were presented as mean (standard deviation or median (interquartile range). ResultsThe study included 270 feet of 171 patients. Mean patient age was 52.3 (standard deviation, 13.1) years, ranging from 21 to 84 years; 133 (77.8%) were women. Of 270 feet, 113 (41.9%) were treated with EVLA and 157 (58.1%) with phlebectomy. The median preoperative CEAP class was 2 (interquartile range, 2-3) in the phlebectomy and EVLA groups, with no statistically significant difference between the groups (P = .507). Dysesthesia was the most common complication in both groups. Only transient induration was significantly different between EVLA (7.1%) and phlebectomy (0.0%) (P = .001). The two approaches had an equal impact on quality of life and disease severity. ConclusionsTreatment complications were similar in phlebectomy and EVLA and to those previously described in the literature.

Clinical Efficacy of a Modified Surgical Procedure in the Treatment of Incompetent Great Saphenous Veins.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical efficacy of a modified surgical procedure for the treatment of varicose veins. This retrospective analysis was conducted on lower extremities with symptomatic great saphenous vein (GSV) incompetence that underwent stripping from the groin to the knee, with preservation of the superficial epigastric vein (SEV), between January 2015 and April 2022. Follow-up assessments were performed using Doppler ultrasound, Venous Clinical Severity Score (VCSS), and the Aberdeen Varicose Vein Questionnaire (AVVQ) at 6 and 12 months after surgery. The study included 179 limbs from 120 patients (47 men and 73 women). The mean patient age was 56.5 years (range, 20-78 years), and the distribution of preoperative Clinical-Etiology-Anatomy-Pathophysiology clinical classes was 8% C0-C1, 88% C2, and 4% C3-C6. The preoperative diameter of the saphenofemoral confluence averaged 6.9 mm (range, 2.7-15.8 mm). After a mean postoperative follow-up period of 24 months, evidence of neovascularization around the stump of the saphenofemoral junction (SFJ) was observed in 2 limbs (1.1%). Additionally, varicose vein recurrence was found in 1 limb (0.6%) and was associated with an incompetent thigh perforator. At postoperative follow- up, both VCSS and AVVQ scores were significantly lower than the preoperative scores. Modified surgical treatment of GSV incompetence, involving preservation of the SEV and stripping of a short segment up to the knee, demonstrated favorable clinical results in terms of postoperative complication rate, neovascularization rate around the SFJ stump, varicose vein recurrence rate, and improvement in lower extremity symptoms.

A comparison of patient-reported outcome measures following technical success and technical failure in the treatment of great saphenous vein incompetence using ClariVein: A subanalysis of a multicenter randomized controlled trial comparing 2% and 3% polidocanol.

This study aimed to compare patient-reported outcomes after technical success (TS) and technical failure (TF) in treating great saphenous vein incompetence (GSV) with ClariVein. A subanalysis of a previous trial was conducted on symptomatic GSV incompetence patients who received ClariVein treatment with 2% or 3% polidocanol (POL) and were followed for 6months. Blinding was implemented for observers and patients, and data from both POL groups were combined. TS was defined as at least 85% occlusion of the treated vein, while TF indicated failure to meet TS criteria. Secondary outcomes included Venous Clinical Severity Score (VCSS), Aberdeen Varicose Vein Questionnaire (AVVQ), and Short-Form 36 Health Survey Questionnaire (SF-36). Among the 364 patients included, the TS rate was 64.5%. Comparison of VCSS, AVVQ, and SF-36 scores between TS and TF groups did not yield significant differences. This study indicates no significant variation in VCSS, AVVQ, and SF-36 scores between patients experiencing TS and TF following ClariVein treatment for GSV insufficiency.

Endovenous Microwave Ablation Versus Radiofrequency Ablation for the Treatment of Lower Limb Varicose Veins

This study aimed to retrospectively compare the clinical outcomes of endovenous microwave versus radiofrequency ablation combined with foam sclerotherapy in patients with lower limb varicose veins. We identified patients with lower limb varicose veins treated with endovenous microwave ablation or radiofrequency ablation with foam sclerotherapy between January 2018 and June 2021 at our institution. Patients were followed-up for 12months. Clinical results, including the pre-post-Aberdeen Varicose Vein Questionnaire and post-Aberdeen Varicose Vein Questionnaire and Venous Clinical Severity Score, were compared. Complications were documented and treated accordingly. We included 287 cases (295 limbs total; endovenous microwave ablation+foam sclerosing agent: n=142, 146 limbs; radiofrequency ablation+foam sclerosing agent: n=145, 149 limbs). The operative time was shorter for endovenous microwave ablation than radiofrequency ablation (42.58±15.62min vs. 65.46±24.38min, P<0.05); however, other procedural parameters did not differ. Furthermore, hospitalization costs for endovenous microwave ablation were lower than those for radiofrequency ablation (21,063.74±850.47 yuan vs. 23,312.40±1,035.86 yuan, P<0.05). At the 12-month follow-up, the great saphenous vein closure rate was similar in both groups (endovenous microwave ablation, 97% [142/146] vs. radiofrequency ablation, 98% [146/149]; P>0.05). Additionally, the satisfaction or incidence rates of complications were not different among the groups. In both groups, the Aberdeen Varicose Vein Questionnaire and Venous Clinical Severity Score values were significantly lower 12months postsurgery than before surgery; however, the postoperative values did not differ. Endovenous microwave ablation effectively treated lower limb varicose veins, with similar short-term effects as radiofrequency ablation. Moreover, it had a shorter operative time and was less expensive than endovenous radiofrequency ablation.

O018 Determining the relationships between venous reflux patterns, clinical severity, and health-related quality of life

Abstract Introduction Various classification systems have been created to describe the anatomical distribution of venous reflux, including the VEIN-TERM and Clinical-Etiology-Anatomy-Pathophysiology (CEAP) classification. It is still unclear whether different reflux patterns correlate with health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and clinical severity. Methods Some 507 chronic venous disease patients and 105 asymptomatic controls underwent duplex ultrasound assessment. Patients were stratified according to VEIN-TERM and the CEAP classification systems. The Aberdeen Varicose Vein Questionnaire (AVVQ) score was used to compare HRQoL and the Venous Clinical Severity Score (VCSS) was used to compare clinical severity between groups. Results Patients were significantly older than controls (p&amp;lt;0.00001). All VEIN-TERM reflux patterns had significantly greater VCSS than no reflux (p&amp;lt;0.001). Superficial axial and combined axial reflux were associated with significantly greater VCSS than superficial segmental reflux (p&amp;lt;0.001, p=0.042 respectively). All VEIN-TERM reflux types had significantly worse AVVQ scores than no reflux (p&amp;lt;0.03). However, there were no significant differences in AVVQ scores across all VEIN-TERM reflux patterns. Most CEAP reflux patterns had increased VCSS and worse AVVQ scores when compared to no reflux (all p&amp;lt;0.05), except for deep reflux, and deep and perforator reflux only. The deep, superficial and perforator reflux group had significantly higher VCSS (p=0.013) and AVVQ (p&amp;lt;0.001) versus the superficial reflux only group. Conclusion When compared to no reflux, both classification systems show associations of any reflux pattern with worse VCSS and AVVQ scores. Combined reflux patterns were associated with the greatest clinical severity and worst HRQoL scores.

Six Year Extension Study of Patients From a Randomised Clinical Trial Comparing Venefit, Radiofrequency Induced Thermal Therapy, and Endovenous Radiofrequency Ablation for Treatment of Incompetent Great Saphenous Veins

To compare long term outcomes after great saphenous vein (GSV) treatment with three radiofrequency (RF) thermal devices: Venefit (Closurefast), Radiofrequency Induced Thermal Therapy (RFITT), and Endovenous Radiofrequency (EVRF). A 72 month follow up of patients who were treated in the randomised 3RF study. A total of 172 participants from the 3RF study were invited to take part in a single visit, long term, follow up study. Failure of GSV closure was assessed with duplex ultrasound (DUS) and constituted the primary outcome. Patients completed questionnaires for secondary outcomes: Aberdeen Varicose Vein Questionnaire (AVVQ), Euroqol 5D (EQ-5D), and patient reported varicose veins measured by counting vein occupying boxes in AVVQ question 1. Twenty-two patients (12%) had already been re-treated. Of the remainder, 13 (7%) could not be contacted, 20 (11%) declined invitation, and one did not consent. Therefore, 116 (64%) and 95 (53%) participants completed questionnaires and DUS, respectively. Failure of GSV closure on 72 month DUS was 16%, 21%, and 37% for Venefit, RFITT, and EVRF, respectively (p= .14), whilst outcomes for all failures were 14%, 17%, and 44% (p < .001) (Venefit vs. EVRF: p < .001; RFITT vs. EVRF: p < .001; and Venefit vs. RFITT: p= .63). There were no between group differences in AVVQ or EQ-5D scores. Rates of patient reported presence of any varicose veins were high for all groups (97%, 92%, and 97% after Venefit, RFITT, and EVRF, respectively; p= .48). The EVRF treated participants reported more extensive recurrence than the Venefit and RFITT participants (p= .008). Long term technical outcomes after RF ablation for GSV varicose veins were significantly better after Venefit and RFITT compared with EVRF treatment. However, quality of life scores showed no differences after 72 months. Rates of patient reporting any varicose veins were high for all treatments. gov Identifier: NCT04720027.

Clinical outcomes following mechanochemical ablation of superficial venous incompetence compared with endothermal ablation: meta-analysis.

Mechanochemical ablation (MOCA) is an alternative method to endovenous thermal ablation (EVTA) for the treatment of superficial venous incompetence that does not require tumescent anaesthesia. The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes from RCTs of MOCA versus EVTA. A search was conducted in MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL). Meta-analysis inclusion was restricted to RCTs comparing MOCA against EVTA. Outcomes included anatomical occlusion rate, disease-specific quality of life using the Aberdeen Varicose Vein Questionnaire, procedural and postprocedural pain, and rates of venous thromboembolism. Four RCTs were included in the meta-analysis comprising 654 patients. The anatomical occlusion rate at 1 year was lower after MOCA than EVTA (risk ratio 0.85, 95 per cent c.i. 0.78 to 0.91; P < 0.001). No significant differences were detected in procedural pain (mean difference -3.25, -14.25 to 7.74; P = 0.560) or postprocedural pain (mean difference -0.63, -2.15 to 0.89; P = 0.420). There were no significant differences in Aberdeen Varicose Vein Questionnaire score at 1 year (mean difference 0.06, -0.50 to 0.62; P = 0.830) or in incidence of venous thromboembolism (risk ratio 0.72, 95 per cent c.i. 0.14 to 3.61; P = 0.690). The rate of successful anatomical occlusion after MOCA is significantly lower than that after EVTA, but there is no difference in procedural and postprocedural pain between the two interventions. Long-term data are required to assess the impact of the reduced vein occlusion rate on clinical outcomes such as quality of life and reintervention.

Early results of cyanoacrylate adhesive ablation versus laser ablation for the treatment of great saphenous vein insufficiency in the Chinese mainland population.

In this study, we present our early outcomes of cyanoacrylate ablation (CA) versus endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) for the treatment of great saphenous vein (GSV) insufficiency in the Chinese mainland population. We retrospectively analyzed 108 patients (53 patients in the CA group and 55 patients in the EVLA group) with GSV insufficiency who were treated with CA and EVLA between May 2020 and May 2021. The Venous Clinical Severity Score and Aberdeen Varicose Vein Questionnaire were used to assess clinical symptoms and quality of life, respectively. Total closure rates and procedure-related adverse events were also recorded in both groups. There was no significant difference between patients treated with CA or EVLA in terms of demographic and clinical characteristics. The average procedure time was 17min in the CA group and 35min in the EVLA group (p < 0.001). The CA group had lower pain scores during the procedure and 3days afterward than the EVLA group (p < 0.001). At month 12, the CA group had a 90.4% closure rate, while the EVLA group had an 83.0% closure rate, with no significant difference between the two groups (p > 0.05). There was no significant difference in the Venous Clinical Severity Score or Aberdeen Varicose Vein Questionnaire score between the groups (p > 0.05). During follow-up, neither group experienced any significant adverse events, such as pulmonary embolism or deep venous thrombosis. The incidence of ecchymosis and paresthesia was significantly lower in the CA group than in the EVLA group (p < 0.05). Cyanoacrylate ablation has a high feasibility profile and is an effective approach to accomplish complete GSV target vein closure at early follow-up in the Chinese patients. Compared to EVLA, the improvement in quality-of-life outcomes is also sustained and similar, with less pain and fewer complications due to the absence of tumescence anesthesia and postprocedural compression stockings.

Evaluation of mid-term results in our patients treated with N-Butyl cyanoacrylate embolization in saphenous vein insufficiency

Aim: The aim of this study is to present our mid-term results obtained from patients with advanced saphenous vein insufficiency treated with N-butyl cyanoacrylate embolization (CAE). Material and Methods: In the present study, we included 1013 patients who were treated with CAE because of moderate and severe saphenous vein insufficiency in Eskişehir Osmangazi University Medical Faculty Hospital Cardiovascular Surgery Clinic between January 2015 and November 2019. The patients were rechecked at 1st, 6th, 12th, 24th and 36th months. Venous Clinical Severity Score (VCSS) and Aberdeen Varicose Vein Questionnaire (AVVQ) results recorded at preoperative and postoperativee period. Doppler ultrasonography (USG) was performed to all patients in all controls. The absence of re-canalized flow in Doppler USG was accepted as the success of the procedure. Results: The mean age of 1013 patients was 51.27±14.30 years (448 men (44.2%) and 565 women (55.8%)). The average procedure time was 12.4±2.1 minutes, the average amount of CA used in the procedure was 1.6 ml (min: 1 ml - max: 2ml). In outpatient controls, complication rates was low, thrombophlebitis occurred in 17 patients (1.7%) and ecchymosis occurred in 9 patients (0.9%). The occlusion rate was 97.6% according to the 1-year follow-up results and 93.3% according to the 3-year follow-up results. The decrease in VCSS and AVVQ scores was statistically significant when the preoperative and postoperative period results compared (p&lt;.05). Conclusion: In the present study, we think that CAE is a safely and effective treatment method for saphenous vein insufficiency. It has low complication, high occlusion rates and provides better comfort to the patients.

Comparison of 5-year outcomes and quality of life between endovenous laser (980 nm) and microwave ablation combined with high ligation for varicose veins.

Our study aims to evaluateand compare the long-term results of endovenous laser (EVLA) and microwave ablation (EMA) combined with high ligation in treating varicose veins (VVs). A total of 122 patients (150 legs) underwent EMA combined with high ligation, and 127 patients (167 legs) underwent EVLA procedures (980 nm) combined with high ligation in this retrospective study. Outcomes included the Aberdeen Varicose Vein Questionnaire (AVVQ) score, the Venous Clinical Severity Score (VCSS), clinical recurrence of VVs and patient satisfaction duringthe 5-year follow-up.During the 5-year follow-up, patients who underwent the EVLA procedure showed a higher recurrence of VVs than those who underwent the EMA procedure (22.75% vs. 13.33%, P = 0.03, odds ratio (OR): 1.91, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.06-3.45), especially at the primary site (6% vs. 14.37%, P = 0.01; OR: 2.63; 95% CI: 1.21-5.72). VV recurrence within 3 years was higher in patients who underwent EVLA than in those who underwent the EMA procedure (73.68% vs. 40%, P = 0.01; OR: 4.2; 95% CI: 1.37-12.86). Compared with those at baseline, the AVVQ score, VCSS and EQ-5D score improved significantly at 5 years for patients who underwent either procedure (P < 0.01); however, the VCSS and AVVQ score were higher for patients who underwent the EVLA procedure (P = 0.05). The patient reintervention rate was higher for EVLA than for EMA (14.79% vs. 7.33%, P = 0.033; OR: 2.19; 95% CI: 2.06-5.34). Our results confirmed that EMA and EVLA improve the QoL of patients and that EMA combined with high ligation demonstrates lower 5-year recurrence, especially at primary sites.

Efficacy and safety of endovenous microwave ablation versus laser ablation for great saphenous vein varicosis: study protocol for a multicentre, randomised controlled non-inferiority trial

IntroductionEndovenous microwave ablation (EMA) is a relatively novel thermal ablation treatment for great saphenous vein (GSV) varicosis, and its efficacy and safety are rarely reported. This study aims to explore...

Clinical outcomes of different endovenous procedures among patients with varicose veins and iliac vein compression: A retrospective cohort study

ObjectiveThis study aimed to investigate the short-term outcomes of three endovenous procedures in patients with varicose veins (VVs) and severe iliac vein compression syndrome (IVCS). MethodsA total of 158 consecutive patients were included in this multicenter retrospective study from May 2017 to December 2019; 54 patients underwent endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) alone, 47 patients underwent EVLA and balloon angioplasty (BA), and 57 patients underwent EVLA and stenting angioplasty (SA). Clinical outcomes and complications were assessed at one and twelve months post-surgery. The Quality of life (QoL) was assessed by the venous clinical severity score (VCSS) and Aberdeen Varicose Vein Questionnaire (AVVQ). ResultsPatients who underwent the SA procedure were older (P < 0.05). Incidence of laser ablation complications was similar among the three procedures; closure rates of the great saphenous vein were 96.8%, 98.0%, and 98.4%, respectively, at 12 months. Reflux times in the SA procedure were lower than those in the EVLA and BA procedures at 12 months, while ulcer healing time was faster with the SA procedure (P < 0.05) than with the other procedures. The VCSS and AVVQ values were significantly improved post-procedure (P < 0.05), with lower AVVQ scores in the SA procedure than in the EVLA and BA procedures at 12 months post-surgery. The EVLA and BA procedures (stenosis >70%) caused a significantly higher symptom recurrence than the SA procedure, with an odds ratios of 14.04 (95% confidence interval (CI), 1.99–99.18) and 10.50 (95% CI, 1.26–87.15), respectively. ConclusionsOur results demonstrate that EVLA and SA procedures relieve symptoms, improve the QoL, and decrease symptom recurrence in patients with VVs and severe IVCS (stenosis >70%).

A multicenter, randomized, dose-finding study of mechanochemical ablation using ClariVein and liquid polidocanol for great saphenous vein incompetence

BackgroundThe purpose of the present study was to identify the ideal polidocanol (POL) concentration for mechanochemical ablation (MOCA) of the great saphenous vein (GSV) using the ClariVein system (Merit Medical, South Jordan, Utah). MethodsWe performed a multicenter, randomized, controlled, single-blind trial with a follow-up period of 6 months. Patients with symptomatic primary truncal GSV incompetence were randomized to MOCA + 2% POL liquid (2% group) or MOCA + 3% POL liquid (3% group). The primary outcome was technical success (TS), defined as an open part of the treated vein segment of ≤10 cm in length. The secondary outcomes were alternative TS, defined as ≥85% occlusion of the treated vein segment, postoperative pain, venous clinical severity scores, Aberdeen varicose vein questionnaire scores, and short-form 36-item health survey questionnaire scores, and complications. ResultsFrom 2012 to 2018, 364 patients (375 limbs) were included, of which, 189 limbs were randomly allocated to the 2% group and 186 to the 3% group. The TS rate at 6 months was 69.8% in the 2% group vs 78.0% in the 3% group (P = .027). A higher overall TS rate was seen in GSVs of ≤5.9 mm compared with GSVs >5.9 mm (84.3% vs 59.5%, respectively; P < .001). The alternative TS rate at 6 months was 61.4% in the 2% group and 67.7% in the 3% group (P = .028). The venous clinical severity scores, Aberdeen varicose vein questionnaire scores, and most short-form 36-item health survey questionnaire domains had improved in both groups (P < .002). Postprocedural pain was low. Two pulmonary embolisms and two deep vein thromboses were seen. Superficial venous thrombosis had occurred more often in the 3% group (18 vs 8 in the 2% group; P = .033). ConclusionsThe results from the present study showed a higher success rate for MOCA with 3% POL liquid than for MOCA with 2% POL liquid at 6 months of follow-up. However, the difference in quality of life was not significant. Long-term follow-up studies are required to investigate whether these results will be sustained in the future.

Comparative analysis of the results of cyanoacrylate ablation and radiofrequency ablation in the treatment of venous insufficiency

BackgroundVaricose vein treatment has shifted to less invasive techniques owing to the complications associated with traditional treatment. The present study was designed to compare the effectiveness of cyanoacrylate ablation (CAA) with radiofrequency ablation (RFA). MethodsPatients who had undergone RFA vs CAA (634 vs 246 patients) to treat great saphenous vein (GSV) insufficiency during a 5-year period were included in the present study. The preoperative and postoperative CEAP (clinical, etiologic, anatomic, pathophysiologic) class, symptoms, recurrence, and Doppler ultrasound findings were compared. ResultsAll the veins in both groups were occluded at day 5. The 1-month closure rates were 97.3% and 98.7% for RFA and CAA, respectively. The overall postoperative closure rates at 5 years were 93.1% and 91.1% for RFA and CAA, respectively. The postoperative symptoms, CEAP class, and Doppler ultrasound findings were similar in both groups. The 5-year symptom-free survival rates were 73.5% and 72.0% in the RFA and CAA groups, respectively. The venous clinical severity scores had decreased from 5.9 ± 1.2 to 0.9 ± 0.8 and 5.8 ± 0.9 to 0.8 ± 0.6 in the RFA and CAA groups, respectively. The Aberdeen varicose vein questionnaire scores had decreased from 19.7 ± 5.5 to 4.8 ± 1.5 in the RFA group and from 18.9 ± 5.8 to 4.9 ± 1.4 in the CAA group. ConclusionsCAA seems to be the ideal treatment for GSV insufficiency because it is suitable for most patients and is nonthermal and nontumescent, with satisfactory results comparable to those with RFA. Long-term outcomes and cost analyses from larger series are required to confirm our findings.