Endovenous Laser Ablation Group Research Articles

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).

Treatment of varicose great saphenous vein with endovenous laser alone or combined with eco-guided foam sclerotherapy: A randomized controlled trial.

Objectives: This study compares Endovenous Laser Ablation (EVLA) alone versus combined with ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy (UGFS) for Great Saphenous Vein (GSV) insufficiency. Methods: Sixty patients were randomly allocated to EVLA or EVLA-UGFS groups which focused on GSV occlusion rates, complications, additional treatments, and quality of life (QoL) changes. Results: Among 55 participants, the EVLA group had higher 12-month occlusion rates (92.3% vs. 75.8%, p = 0.11). Nervous injury (NI) was rarer in EVLA-UGFS (3.4% vs. 23.1%, p = 0.04). No significant difference in other complication rates (p > 0.05). QoL improved in both groups (p < 0.001). EVLA-UGFS required more subsequent procedures (24.1% vs. 7.7%, p = 0.03). Conclusions: EVLA and EVLA-UGFS effectively treat GSV insufficiency, enhancing QoL. The combined method reduces NI risk but may require more follow-up procedures.

Endovenous Microwave Ablation Versus Laser Ablation for Small Saphenous Vein Varicosis.

Laser and radiofrequency ablation are two thermal ablation methods currently widely used to treat lower limb venous insufficiency. However, very few studies have been conducted on the use of microwaves, a form of thermal ablation, for the treatment of small saphenous vein (SSV) insufficiency. This study aimed to examine the efficacy and safety of endovenous microwave ablation (EMA) for the treatment of SSV insufficiency. The clinical data of 126 patients (126 lower limbs) with SSV insufficiency (SSV trunk reflux time ≥ 500ms on lower limb color Doppler ultrasound) treated at the Surgery Department of The Sixth People's Hospital of Zhuji from January 2020 to June 2022 were analyzed retrospectively; 64 patients underwent EMA and 62 underwent endovenous laser ablation (EVLA). The perioperative marker data [duration of surgery, duration of hospitalization, length of thermal ablation, duration of thermal ablation, number of incisions, and numerical pain rating scale (NPRS)], complication data [skin ecchymosis, skin burns, surgical site infection, paresthesia, deep vein thrombosis (DVT), and heat-induced thrombosis (EHIT)], venous clinical severity score (VCSS), chronic venous disease quality of life questionnaire (CIVIQ-20) before and 1, 3, 12months after surgery, and SSV trunk occlusion rate at 12months after surgery were compared between the two groups. No significant differences in the surgery or hospitalization durations were observed between the two groups. There were no significant differences in the length of the SSV that required thermal ablation between the two groups; however, the thermal ablation time was shorter in the EMA group than that in the EVLA group (6.14 ± 1.47min vs 7.05 ± 1.16min, P < 0.001). There were no statistical differences in the number of incisions, volume of tumescent solution used, or quantity of sclerosing foam used. The NPRS scores of the EMA group at 24h and 72h after surgery were significantly greater than those of the EVLA group (4.03 ± 0.98 vs 3.52 ± 1.28, P = 0.013; 3.78 ± 1.06 vs 3.15 ± 1.03, P = 0.001). Moreover, the two groups showed no significant difference in the NPRS score at 1month (1.14 ± 0.84 vs 1.07 ± 0.75, P = 0.623). The EMA and EVLA group patients experienced similar postoperative complications. The VCSS and CIVIQ-20 score significantly improved at 1, 3, and 12months after surgery. The VCSS and CIVIQ-20 scores were compared between the two groups at 12months after surgery, and there were no significant differences (1.44 ± 0.63 vs 1.56 ± 0.56, P = 0.261; 24.24 ± 4.96 vs 25.19 ± 5.36, P = 0.304). There was no significant difference in the incidence of SSV trunk occlusion at 12months after surgery between the two groups (95.31% vs 96.77%, OR 1.475; 95%CI 0.238-9.146, P = 1.000). EMA and EVLA are equally effective treatment methods for SSV insufficiency. EMA is associated with higher NPRS scores in the early postoperative period.

Efficacy and safety of mechanochemical ablation versus laser ablation in the treatment of primary great saphenous vein reflux: A randomized, open, parallel controlled clinical trial.

To evaluate the efficacy of a new mechanochemical ablation (MOCA) device versus endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) for primary great saphenous vein (GSV) reflux. Prospectively analyze the demographics, treatment detail and outcomes data of 57 primary GSV reflux patients. Patients were randomly assigned to MOCA or EVLA group with random envelope method. Primary endpoint was 6-month closure rate of GSV. Secondary endpoint including technical success rate, the venous clinical severity score (VCSS), chronic venous insufficiency questionnaire (CIVIQ-20) score and visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain. The procedures were well tolerated according to the VAS score. The 6-month closure rate was 85.71% in MOCA and 96.55% in EVLA group (p = .194). Significant changes were observed in regard of VCSS and CIVIQ-20 score at 6-month follow-up. Skin paresthesia occurred in 0 in MOCA and 5 in EVLA group. The new MOCA device is safe and effective in treating primary great saphenous vein reflux. The 6-month closure rate is non-inferior compared with EVLA. However, the long-term results need further follow-up.

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.

Effectiveness of iliac vein stenting combined with endovenous laser treatment of recurrent varicose veins associated with iliac vein compression.

Iliac vein compression syndrome (IVCS) is an underlying cause of varicose vein (VV) recurrence after venous surgery. However, the management of recurrent varicose veins (RVVs) combined with IVCS has rarely been reported. This study aimed to investigate the outcomes of a one-stop procedure to correct outflow obstruction and superficial reflux for patients with RVVs and IVCS. A retrospective analysis was conducted of 102 consecutive patients diagnosed with RVVs. Computed tomography venography (CTV) was performed to confirm IVCS. The cases were divided into 2 groups: the IRVVs group, including patients with RVVs and IVCS (n=48), and the RVVs group, including patients with RVVs only (n=54). The characteristics, vein reflux, and clinical, etiological, anatomical, and pathophysiological (CEAP) distribution were investigated. Then, the IRVVs group patients who underwent endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) (n=39) were divided into a further 2 groups: the EVLA + S group (n=19), who received EVLA and stenting of iliac vein, and the EVLA group (n=20), who received EVLA treatment alone. The great/small saphenous vein (GSV/SSV) trunk occlusion, VV recurrence, visual analogue scale (VAS), and venous clinical severity score (VCSS) were investigated. The prevalence rate of femoral vein reflux was 81.2% in IRVVs group and 50% in RVVs group (P<0.05). In the IRVVs group, 72.9% of patients manifested as CEAP clinical class >3, which was higher than that in RVVs group (48.1%) (P<0.05). The 12-month GSV/SSV occlusion rate in the EVLA + S and EVLA groups were 94.7% and 90.0%, respectively. Totals of 9 patients in EVLA + S group and 6 patients in EVLA group had active venous ulcers, and the ulcer healing time in EVLA + S group was significantly shorter (27.22±7.12 vs. 46.67±9.83 days, P<0.05). The reductions in the VAS and VCSS values between baseline, 1 month, and 12 months in the EVLA + S group were more obvious than those in EVLA group (P<0.05). The one-stop combination treatment of iliac venous stenting and EVLA in patients with RVVs and IVCS is safe and effective and provides prominent symptom relief, improved quality of life, and a more satisfactory ulcer healing than EVLA alone.

The first meta-analysis research on the effects of endovenous laser ablation combined with sapheno-femoral junction high ligation of the great saphenous vein.

Endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) is a common minimally invasive technique used to treat varicose veins. The most commonly used laser wavelengths for EVLA/EVLT of varicose veins are 810 nm and 1470 nm. The laser pulse frequency is typically set to continuous wave (CW) mode, with a pulse duration of a few milliseconds (ms) delivered in a radial mode. The energy delivered per pulse is typically set between 40 and 120 Joules, with a power setting of 10 to 30 watts and an intensity setting of 40 to 120 J/cm2. The controversy exists regarding the benefits of performing saphenofemoral junction (SFJ) ligation prior to EVLA to decrease the recurrence rate of varicose veins. This meta-analysis aims to investigate the effectiveness of combining EVLA with high ligation versus using EVLA alone in treating lower extremity varicose veins. We conducted a systematic search of four databases from their inception until July 1, 2022, for randomized controlled trials and prospective controlled trials evaluating the advantages and disadvantages of EVLA with or without high ligation for the treatment of lower extremity varicose veins. In analyzing binary data, rate difference (RD) is used, while odds ratio (OR) is used for evaluating the confidence interval (CI) of binary data. A P value of less than 0.05 is deemed statistically significant. Heterogeneity is assessed using the chi-square test. If the I2 statistic, which reflects statistical heterogeneity, is greater than 50%, a random-effects model should be used. In the absence of significant statistical heterogeneity, a fixed-effects model should be used if I2 is less than 50%. We used the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool to assess the quality of the studies and Review Manager 5.4 for the primary and secondary outcome analysis. The meta-analysis was conducted in accordance with the Cochrane Handbook. There were no significant differences in the rate of major complications (RR = 1.63; 95% CI, 0.40-6.69; P = 0.50) or in the frequency of minor complications (RR = 1.07, 95% CI, 0.87-1.31; P = 0.52) between the EVLA with high ligation (EVLA/HL) group and the EVLA group. However, the rate of vein occlusion was significantly lower in the EVLA group than in the EVLA/HL group (RR = 1.06; 95% CI, 1.03-1.09; P = 0.0004). Our meta-analysis indicates that combining EVLA with high ligation provides stable long-term clinical efficacy in treating varicose veins of the lower extremities, although it increases the invasiveness of the surgery. The use of EVLA alone may be less effective in preventing vein occlusion.

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.

Petogodišnji klinički rezultati lečenja 1073 pacijenta sa proširenim venama, lečenih radiofrekventnom ablacijom, endovenskom laserskom ablacijom i embolizacijom cijanoakrilatom

Background: There is little research on the long-term outcomes of radiofrequency ablation, endovenous laser ablation, and cyanoacrylate embolization. This study retrospectively examined the clinical results of radiofrequency ablation, endovenous laser ablation, and cyanoacrylate embolization methods. Materials and Methods: The population of the study consisted of 1256 patients who applied to the clinic with the diagnosis of chronic venous insufficiency between the specified dates and were treated with endovenous varicose veins. Sample: 431 patients in the cyanoacrylate embolization group, 230 patients in the radiofrequency ablation group, 412 patients in the endovenous laser ablation group, a total of 1073 patients. Bilateral cyanoacrylate embolization, radiofrequency ablation, and endovenous laser ablation were not applied to the patients in the same session. Results: When the 1-year occlusion rates were examined, it was determined as 97.57%, 98.26%, and 95.59% in the endovenous laser ablation, radiofrequency ablation, and cyanoacrylate embolization groups, respectively. There was no significant difference in Venous Clinical Severity Score scores between the groups before and after the procedure. Pain, paresthesia, ecchymosis, pigmentation, induration, burn, deep vein thrombosis, and phlebitis were significantly more common in the endovenous laser ablation group. Conclusions: Complications were seen in the cyanoacrylate embolization group. Endovenous laser ablation, radiofrequency ablation, and cyanoacrylate embolization applications have similar long-term results. Therefore, cyanoacrylate embolization is recommended for chronic venous insufficiency patients who want to get rid of varicose veins and improve their quality of life.

FOVELASS: A Randomised Trial of Endovenous Laser Ablation Versus Polidocanol Foam for Small Saphenous Vein Incompetence

To compare the outcomes of ultrasound guided foam sclerotherapy (UGFS) and endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) to treat isolated small saphenous vein (SSV) incompetence in a multicentre randomised controlled study (RCT; ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05468450). Patients aged ≥ 18 years undergoing isolated SSV treatment (reflux > 0.5 seconds) were randomised to UGFS or EVLA. Patients treated with UGFS were allowed one additional truncal treatment at six weeks. Tributary treatments (phlebectomy or sclerotherapy) were permitted after six months. Participants were assessed at eight days, six months, and one, two, and three years. The primary endpoint was the absence of SSV reflux (> 0.5 seconds). Secondary outcomes included clinical scores and quality of life (QoL) scores. All analyses were done by intention to treat. Of 1 522 screened patients, 161were randomised to UGFS (n= 82) and EVLA (n= 79). Only 3% of patients who received UGFS had the second (allowed) treatment and 86% of patients completed the three year study. Forty-one and 19 tributary treatments (by sclerotherapy) were performed in 27 UGFS patients (33%) and 15 EVLA patients (19%), respectively. The complete absence of reflux at three years was significantly better after EVLA (86%) than after UGFS (56%) (odds ratio [OR] 5.36, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.31 - 12.44; risk ratio 1.59, 95% CI 1.26 - 2.01). Two deep vein thromboses (DVTs; one femoropopliteal and one gastrocnemius) and one endovenous heat induced thrombosis occurred in the EVLA group. Seven DVTs were seen in the UGFS group, including two partial popliteal DVTs and five gastrocnemius veins thromboses (four asymptomatic and incidental on day 8 screening). At three years, there was no difference between groups for the following: rate of visible varices (p= .87), revised Venous Clinical Severity Score (p= .28), and QoL (p= .59). Patient satisfaction scores were high in both groups (median score: EVLA 97/100 and UGFS 93/100; p= .080). Symptoms were significantly improved in both groups. (p < .001) CONCLUSION: Technical success was better for EVLA than for UGFS three years after SSV treatment. This agrees with studies that have reported on these treatments in the great saphenous vein. However, improvements in clinical outcome were similar for both groups.

Comparative Study of Cyanoacrylate Glue and Endovenous Laser Ablation Techniques for the Treatment of Varicose Veins

Aim: The aim of this study is to provide a comparison between two minimally invasive techniques; cyanoacrylate glue (CG) and endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) for the treatment of varicose veins. Material and Method: This study was a retrospective study of patients with varicose veins who underwent EVLA or CG techniques between January 2018 and December 2021. The demographic characteristics of the patients, patient complaints and symptoms, postoperative 1st and 6th month Doppler-Ultrasound control results and preoperative-postoperative comparisons were made. Results: A total of 200 adult patients were treated with CG (n=54) or EVLA (n=146) techniques. The doppler- ultrasound tests of the 1st and 6th months determined that the success rates of the EVLA and CG groups were 96.6% and 92.6%, respectively. Conclusion: Statistically significant was observed in both groups when the results of the pre-postoperative Venous Clinical Severity Score of CG and EVLA patients were evaluated. From the data analysis, we have found that the duration of the procedure was significantly shorter in the CG group, the ecchymosis and erythema were observed significantly less in the CG group, and the return time to normal activity was shorter in the CG group.

Comparative study between using of radio frequency ablation and endovenous laser ablation in the treatment of primary lower limb varicose veins

Background: Varicose veins are a frequent vascular issue. Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and Endo-venous laser ablation (EVLA) are endo-venous treatments for varicose veins. Endo-venous therapy demonstrated superior outcomes than standard high ligation and stripping in terms of pain, quality of life, healing, and recurrence. The RFA and ELA surpass vein stripping in morbidity, outcome, and neovascularization (recurrence), which is attributed for greater recurrence rates. Aim: We aim to compare between using of radio frequency ablation and endo-venous laser ablation in the treatment of primary lower limb varicose veins as regard to complications, treatment failure,recurrence. Methods: This prospective randomized controlled study was conducted in the vascular surgery department at Al-Azhar university hospitals (Al-Hussein and Sayed Galal), in the period from September 2020 to June 2022 (20 months). The study included 50 patients, males were 22(44%) while females were 28(56%), Presented by primary varicose veins. Results: In EVLA group Recanalization of short-segment occlusion was done in 4 patients, Recanalization of long-segment occlusion was done in 2 patients and recurrent varicose veins happened in 5 patients.

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...

A prospective multicenter randomized clinical trial comparing endovenous laser ablation, using a 1470 nm diode laser in combination with a Tulip-TipTM fiber versus radiofrequency (Closure FAST™ VNUS®), in the treatment of primary varicose veins.

The treatment of chronic venous disease, has largely shifted from high ligation and stripping to endovenous thermal ablation (EVTA) techniques, because of its comparable efficacy and lack of invasiveness. This clinical trial aimed to compare the efficacy of two thermal ablation techniques, endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) 1470-nm with Tulip-TipTM fiber and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) ClosureFastTM using a non-inferiority design for occlusion rate (primary outcome). A prospective multicenter randomized clinical trial randomized 280 patients for the treatment of great saphenous vein (GSV) reflux. Primary outcome was the GSV occlusion rate, secondary outcome factors were the possible side-effects of the treatment such as pain, ecchymosis, quality of Life (CIVIQ-20), revised Venous Clinical Severity Score (r-VCSS). One-year follow-up period. The total occlusion rates at one year follow-up were 96.4% and 94.5% in the EVLA and RFA groups respectively (P=0.15). Regarding secondary outcomes, such as postoperative CIVIQ-20, r-VCSS, analgesia, absenteeism, there was no significant difference between both treatment groups. RFA and EVLA, using a 1470 nm laser with Tulip-TipTM fiber, of the GSV results in equal occlusion rates at one year, with comparable postoperative pain and improved quality of life.

Comparative analysis of endovenous laser ablation versus ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy for the treatment of venous leg ulcers.

Endovenous thermal and non‐thermal therapeutic approaches have become standard of care for the treatment of venous insufficiency. However, comparative studies on its use in the population of venous leg ulcer patients are scarce. The present study aimed at a comparison of the efficacy of endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) and ultrasound‐guided foam sclerotherapy (UGFS) for the treatment of venous leg ulcers (VUs). We retrospectively analyzed patient records of 68 patients with active VUs (C6 of the CEAP‐classification), who underwent EVLA (n = 33) or UGFS (n = 35) between January 2001 and January 2021. In 68 patients, 97 venous segments (GSV: 43, SSV: 17, NSV: 37) were treated. Ulcer surface area at initial presentation did not differ significantly between both treatment groups (EVLA: 7.7 ± 10.7 vs. UGFS: 8.5 ± 16.3 cm2; p = 0.73). No significant difference regarding patient characteristics was found, with the exception of age, as patients receiving UGFS treatment were significantly older (EVLA: 61 ± 17 vs. UGFS: 70 ± 14 years; p = 0.018). The rate of ulcer resolution was not significantly different between EVLA and UGFS groups (97.0% vs. 85.7%; p = 0.20). Also, the mean time to complete ulcer healing after endovenous intervention was comparable (EVLA: 59 ± 37 vs. UGFS: 63 ± 41 days; p = 0.68). However, the relapse rate was significantly higher for UGFS than for EVLA treated patients (31.4% vs. 3.0%; p = 0.002). Taken together, rates of ulcer resolution and ulcer healing time after endovenous intervention were comparable between both treatment modalities. Nevertheless, a significantly higher relapse rate was observed in UGFS treated patients.

The multimodal treatment approaches to varicose veins: Preservation versus thermal ablation of the incompetent great saphenous vein

Objective: To compare the clinical efficacy of Ambulatory Selective Varices Ablation under Local Anesthesia (ASVAL) and Endovenous Laser Ablation (EVLA) with concomitant phlebectomy in patients with the incompetent Great Saphenous Vein (GSV). Design: “Prospective Case Series study (C2-C3 patients) with 2 and 5 years follow-up. Methods: This was a prospective observational cohort study in a single center. Seventy-six patients (59 females) with GSV incompetence and C2-C3 were included in the prospective consecutive case study. The diameter of GSV at the 15-cm below the SFJ level was the main criterion to identify two groups of patients. Thirty-three patients (25 females, mean age 37.03) with the GSV diameter ≤6 mm were treated with ASVAL. Forty-three patients (34 females, mean age 46.19) with the GSV diameter &gt;6 mm were treated by EVLA with concomitant phlebectomy. Clinical and functional outcomes measured by Venous Clinical Severity Score (VCSS) and clinical recurrence-free rate according to the classification of recurrent varicose veins after treatment (PREVAIT) were analyzed in 2 years follow-up. The clinical recurrence-free rate was analyzed in 5 years follow-up. Results: 2-year follow-up was detected a significant decrease in the postoperative VCSS in the ASVAL and the EVLA group (p&lt; 0.001). There was no statistically significant difference between both groups in VCCS in 2 years post-operation (p= 0.681). Frequency of recurrence did not differ between ASVAL (18.8%) and EVLA (21.4%) groups 2 years after treatment (p= 0.776) and the diameter of the GSV significantly decreased in the ASVAL group (5.48 vs 5.13, p= 0.008). The 5-year follow-up was detected recurrences in 40.0% of patients ASVAL group and 45.6% EVLA group (p = 0.668). Conclusions: Both ASVAL and EVLA effectively improve the disease severity in the groups of patients, selected according to the GSV diameter (≤ 6 mm or &gt; 6 mm).

Treatment of superficial venous insufficiency in a large patient cohort with retrograde administration of ultrasound-guided polidocanol endovenous microfoam versus endovenous laser ablation

ObjectiveTo evaluate outcomes among symptomatic patients with superficial chronic venous insufficiency treated with retrograde ultrasound-guided polidocanol endovenous microfoam 1% (PEM) or endovenous laser ablation (EVLA). MethodsThis study is a retrospective chart review from a single vein center between October 2013 and June 2019. Procedures were performed on 1070 patients with Clinical, Etiologic, Anatomic, and Pathophysiologic class 2 to 6 disease and symptomatic superficial venous reflux of the great saphenous vein or anterior accessory saphenous vein. ResultsPEM was used for 550 procedures and patients were followed for 43 ± 13 months; EVLA was used for 520 procedures and patients were followed for 57 ± 18 months. After complete treatment, the elimination of reflux was documented in 93.5% (514/550) and 92.8% (482/520) of the PEM and EVLA procedures, respectively. During the follow-up period, 18% of patients treated with EVLA returned for additional treatment to address residual symptoms in the affected leg. In C6 patients treated with PEM, 69% of ulcers (11/16) healed in less than 1 month, compared with 5% of patients (1/21) treated with EVLA. In C4 patients with lesions, resolution of spontaneous bleeding was 100% in both groups. There were no neurological or cardiac adverse events in the PEM group. Minor complications included asymptomatic deep vein thrombosis (0.5%), one common femoral vein thrombus extension, and superficial venous thrombosis (4%) in the PEM group and asymptomatic deep vein thrombosis (0.8%) and two endovenous heat-induced thromboses in the EVLA group. ConclusionsPEM is comparable in safety and efficacy with EVLA for the treatment of saphenous reflux and associated symptoms. PEM was an effective intervention for most patients with C6 disease. Closure rates in both groups were maintained 36 months after treatment.

Comparison of Non-Tumescent n-Butyl Cyanoacrylate and Endovenous Laser Therapy in Saphenous Vein Ablation

Objective: Ablation of N-butyl cyanoacrylate (NBCA) and endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) are two important techniques used in the treatment of venous insufficiency. The aim of this study is to compare the results of EVLA and NBCA methods in the treatment of saphenous vein insufficiency. Method: 739 patients with saphenous vein insufficiency who were followed up between 2013 and 2018 and treated with NBCA (350 patients) and EVLA (389 patients) applications were included in the study. Pre-procedure, during, post-procedure and follow-up data of the patients were collected and compared retrospectively. Results: In the group using NBCA technique; mean age was 46.09±6.12 years, mean age was 48.08±6.11 years in the EVLA technique group. The mean ablated vein length was 32.97-65.83 cm in the NBCA group and 30.65-67.25 cm in the EVLA group. The mean procedure time was 7 minutes in the NBCA group and 18 minutes in the EVLA group. The 12-month total occlusion rates in the NBCA and EVLA groups were 98.8% and 97.6%, respectively. In both the NBCA and EVLA groups, the post-procedure Venous Clinical Severity Score (VCSS) was significantly reduced with no difference between the groups. When NBCA treatment was compared with EVLA treatment, it was seen that there may be fewer side effects after NBCA treatment. Conclusion: When the treatment success rates, application times, complication rates and venous clinical severity scoring results in the data obtained in our study were evaluated, it was thought that the NBCA method was as successful and reliable as the EVLA method. In conclusion; It has been suggested that the vascular closure system with NBCA is a fast and effective treatment method in the treatment of saphenous vein insufficiency, as it does not require tumescent anesthesia, does not require compression stockings, and does not have the risk of paresthesia, burn scars or pigmentation.

Long-term outcomes of endovenous laser ablation, n-butyl cyanoacrylate, and radiofrequency ablation for treatment of chronic venous insufficiency

BackgroundIn the present retrospective, single-center study, we evaluated the long-term effectiveness and reliability of endovenous laser ablation (EVLA), endovenous n-butyl cyanoacrylate (NBCA) application, and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) in the management of chronic venous insufficiency (CVI). MethodsThe medical records of patients who had undergone EVLA, NBCA, or RFA for CVI from January 1, 2014 to January 1, 2017 were reviewed. The medical records included data on sex, age, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, and symptoms at admission. The great saphenous vein diameter, CEAP (Clinical, Etiology, Anatomy, and Pathophysiology) classification, and venous clinical severity score were also recorded. All the patients were followed up with physical examinations and color Doppler ultrasound scan at the first week and 6 and 12 months after treatment. After 12 months, the follow-up examinations were performed annually. ResultsA total of 232 patients who had undergone lower limb CVI surgical treatment (EVLA, n = 77; NBCA, n = 73; RFA, n = 82). The mean follow-up time was 67.5 ± 4.7 months. The procedure duration was significantly shorter for the NBCA group (13.5 minutes) vs that for the EVLA (31.7 minutes) and RFA (27.9 minutes) groups (P = .001). The pain score was highest in the EVLA group (P = .001). The EVLA group had also experienced a significantly greater incidence of complications and a longer time to return to daily activities (P = .001). The post hoc analysis revealed comparable occlusion success among the three groups on the first postoperative day and at 6, 12, and 24 months postoperatively. However, significantly better occlusion rates were found for RFA vs EVLA at 3 and 5 years of follow-up (P = .024 and P = .011, respectively). The success of NBCA and RFA was similar at 3 and 5 years of follow-up (P = .123 and P = .330, respectively). ConclusionsThe outcomes showed similar early postoperative occlusion success among all three CVI treatment techniques. However, RFA resulted in a significantly higher success rate compared with EVLA at 3 and 5 years of follow-up. Additionally, the NBCA and RFA procedures achieved comparable long-term success. However, EVLA was associated with significantly greater complication rates and pain scores and a longer time to return to daily activities. The NBCA procedure had a significantly shorter operation time compared with the other procedures.

Outcome of High Ligation combined with stripping and endovenous laser ablation of the great saphenous Vein: an early results of a single center Study

Introduction: The classic intervention for saphenous vein varicosity has been Saphenous femoral junction ligation with stripping. But now endogenous laser ablations are recommended over surgery. Method: This is the retrospective study of 122 patients, conducted for the period of one year in the department of Cardio Thoracic and Vascular Surgery of Bir Hospital, Nepal. Results: Out of 122 cases, 84 were of Endovenous Laser Ablation, 31 cases Ligation and Stripping and 8 cases of sclerotherapy with complete success rate in all group. There was a one case of deep vein injury in Liagtion and Stripping group and one case of skin burn in Endovenous Laser Ablation group, along with other minor injuries. Conclusion: Both group have complete success rate however, hospital stay of patients in Endovenous Laser Ablation group was shorter and reassumed daily activities earlier.