We did not suggest a very high neovascularization rate after radiofrequency ablation (RFA) of the great saphenous vein. We did discuss a possible connection between what other authors called neovascularization and what we prefer to name small vessel networks. A major reason why we selected small vessel network was to avoid the connotation associated with the concept of neovascularization. Our intention was also to critique the use of the term neovascularization without proof that these vessels did not exist before. For one reason, existing small vessels may dilate in response to an inflammatory process and may constrict after the inflammation subsides. Clinically, thrombosis may occur in the postoperative period in untreated segments proximal and distal to the segment exposed to the RFA and also within the treated segment. Furthermore, patients have complained of localized pain or discomfort starting months after a successful RFA. This localized pain was associated with a visible vein valve sinus either totally thrombosed or partially recanalized; pain was associated with a thrombus that seemed hypoechoic enough to be considered recent. There is growing evidence associating the appearance of small vessels, including arterialized flow, with thrombus. In our articles, we also made the distinction between recanalization and reflux. The term recanalization was preferred to avoid the clinical inference associated with the concept of reflux. At early stages of recanalization, clinical reflux is commonly absent. This recanalization can be temporary and limited in length. (A reason why recanalization was higher in this series than previously reported may be that we considered recanalization segments as short as 1 or 2 cm occurring at any level.) An unstable cycle of thrombosis, inflammation, thrombolysis, recanalization, reduction of inflammation, low-flow condition, and then new thrombosis has been suspected. Eventually the recanalization either becomes wide enough to be part of a local network of small vessels or thrombosis dominates, and, with thrombus aging, the vein segment becomes atretic and atrophic and eventually disappears as such, becoming unrecognizable by ultrasonography. We also have described small vessel networks associated with telangiectasias. It is not surprising to detect small vessel networks in these patients before or after treatment of the saphenous vein. Patients have described the appearance of new telangiectasias after saphenous vein treatment, RFA, or stripping. We have connected the appearance of such new telangiectasias to the small vessels surrounding thrombosed, treated segments of the saphenous vein, mostly large vein valve sinuses. Small vessel networks can also be noted around thrombus inside the canal previously occupied by a stripped saphenous vein. Rather than dismiss the findings of small vessel networks noted after treatment of the saphenous vein, we should investigate whether and when the presence of these channels has a clinical effect. The first step was to recognize the presence of such small vessel networks. Regarding “Ultrasound findings after radiofrequency ablation of the great saphenous vein: Descriptive analysis”Journal of Vascular SurgeryVol. 42Issue 3PreviewIn the recent article by Sergio Salles-Cunha et al,1 the authors suggest a very high neovascularization rate after radiofrequency ablation (RF) of the great saphenous vein (GSV), which does not correspond to our own experience. The authors describe small vessel networks (SVN), which covers without discrimination all vessels smaller than 2 mm in the surrounding tissue of the treated GSV, including muscular, collateral, and tributary veins and their satellite arteries. The high prevalence of these SVN elements in the groin area and at the thigh level is interpreted as the result of a process similar to the neovascularization described after GSV ligation and stripping. Full-Text PDF Open Archive