-
Journal of Vascular Surgery. Venous and... Nov 2020Insurance approval for saphenous vein ablation is generally limited to junctional reflux involving the great saphenous vein (GSV) or small saphenous vein. This study was... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study
BACKGROUND
Insurance approval for saphenous vein ablation is generally limited to junctional reflux involving the great saphenous vein (GSV) or small saphenous vein. This study was designed to investigate prevalence and disease severity of anterior accessory GSV (AAGSV) compared with GSV disease in patients presenting to dedicated outpatient vein centers.
METHODS
Deidentified data were pulled from the American Vein & Lymphatic Society PRO Venous Registry for first and second patient encounters. Variables included age, sex, and body mass index (BMI); clinical class of Clinical, Etiology, Anatomy, and Pathophysiology (CEAP) classification; revised Venous Clinical Severity Score (rVCSS); and duplex ultrasound values for each limb. Data were further scrutinized according to duplex ultrasound findings. Patients with normal findings on duplex ultrasound examination or evidence of acute or chronic thrombosis were excluded. Patients were further characterized into two groups. The primary group had no prior vein treatment vs the progressive group, in which patients have had a superficial venous intervention at some point in the past.
RESULTS
There were 6836 unique patients with duplex ultrasound patterns of either AAGSV or GSV above the knee or both AAGSV and GSV in either group. This pool contained 2604 patients with recorded CEAP class and rVCSS, representing 2664 patient limbs in the final data set. In comparison to limbs in the progressive group, AAGSV reflux was more common in the primary group (78/563 vs 209/2101; P < .01). Demographic features of the groups demonstrated no significant difference. The primary group demonstrated a significantly higher rVCSS (6.95 vs 6.10; P < .01) than the progressive group. Patients in the primary group also demonstrated a significantly higher incidence of more advanced disease (CEAP class C4 and above; 43.1% vs 24.8%; P < .0001) than those in the progressive group. The primary group demonstrated no significant differences in age, sex proportions, or mean BMI. The mean rVCSS for GSV of these patients (7.22) was significantly higher than that of AAGSV patients (5.63; P < .01). The incidence of superficial vein thrombosis for the AAGSV patients (6.41%) was significantly higher than that of the GSV patients (2.17%; P < .05) in the progressive group. Patients in the progressive group demonstrated no significant difference in age, sex proportions, mean BMI, or average rVCSS. The proportion of AAGSV limbs with superficial thrombosis events (37/287 [12.9%]) was significantly higher than that for GSV (59/2214 [2.7%]; P < .01).
CONCLUSIONS
AAGSV reflux is common and carries similar morbidity to GSV reflux. It is manifested with an alarming presence of superficial vein thrombosis.
Topics: Ambulatory Care; Disease Progression; Female; Humans; Incidence; Male; Middle Aged; Prevalence; Registries; Retrospective Studies; Saphenous Vein; Severity of Illness Index; Thrombophlebitis; Ultrasonography, Doppler, Duplex; Venous Insufficiency; Venous Thrombosis
PubMed: 32205127
DOI: 10.1016/j.jvsv.2020.02.010 -
Journal of the European Academy of... Feb 2023
Topics: Humans; Tattooing; Thrombophlebitis; Lower Extremity
PubMed: 35993749
DOI: 10.1111/jdv.18551 -
Clinical Case Reports Nov 2019Penile Mondor's disease or thrombophlebitis of the superficial dorsal penile vein is a rare disorder of the penis. Reported cases in the literature are mostly focal...
Penile Mondor's disease or thrombophlebitis of the superficial dorsal penile vein is a rare disorder of the penis. Reported cases in the literature are mostly focal thrombus. We present clinical and sonographic images of an extensive superficial dorsal penile vein thrombosis.
PubMed: 31788306
DOI: 10.1002/ccr3.2469 -
British Journal of Community Nursing Jun 2019
Topics: Humans; Thrombophlebitis
PubMed: 31166771
DOI: 10.12968/bjcn.2019.24.6.263 -
The Lancet. Rheumatology Aug 2020
PubMed: 38273612
DOI: 10.1016/S2665-9913(20)30088-6 -
BMC Veterinary Research Sep 2022Although the jugular vein is a major important blood vessel in equine, the literature lacks this vessel's normal B-mode and Doppler ultrasonographic examinations in...
BACKGROUND
Although the jugular vein is a major important blood vessel in equine, the literature lacks this vessel's normal B-mode and Doppler ultrasonographic examinations in donkeys. Therefore, this study aimed to determine the reference ranges of B-mode and Doppler ultrasonographic indices of jugular veins in healthy adult donkeys (Equus asinus) and the possible effect of examination side (left and right), gender, and body condition on the ultrasonographic measurements of this vessel. B-mode and Doppler ultrasound imaging of the external jugular vein was conducted on 20 adult healthy donkeys of both sexes.
RESULTS
In all donkeys, the jugular vein was 4.01 to 8.1 mm from the body surface. The longitudinal and transverse venous diameters ranged from 3.94 to 10.5 mm and from 0.88 to 1.9 cm, respectively. Moreover, the vein areas varied from 0.61 to 2.83 cm. The reference values of superficial and deep wall thickness (SWT and DWT) were 0.56 ± 0.2 and 0.6 ± 0.13 mm, respectively. The blood velocity, blood follow rate, and congestion index of the external jugular vein can be expected in adult healthy donkeys as a range value from 8.4 to 13.5 cm/sec, from 0.33 to 1.78 ml/min, and from 0.06 to 0.27 cm.sec, respectively. Generally, the vein showed laminar monophasic waveforms. The examination side and gender have no significant effect on the ultrasound measurements of the vein (P > 0.05). Donkeys with a body condition score (BCS) ≥ 3 revealed increases in the depth of the vein (P < 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS
The results of this study can be used as reference values and provide a basis for comparison when evaluating donkeys with diseases that affect blood flow in the external jugular vein.
Topics: Animals; Equidae; Female; Horses; Jugular Veins; Male; Ultrasonography; Ultrasonography, Doppler, Color
PubMed: 36104788
DOI: 10.1186/s12917-022-03441-y -
Obesity Pillars Dec 2023This Obesity Medicine Association (OMA) Clinical Practice Statement (CPS) is intended to provide clinicians with an overview on obesity, thrombosis, venous disease,...
BACKGROUND
This Obesity Medicine Association (OMA) Clinical Practice Statement (CPS) is intended to provide clinicians with an overview on obesity, thrombosis, venous disease, lymphatic disease, and lipedema.
METHODS
The scientific support for this CPS is based upon published citations, clinical perspectives of OMA authors, and peer review by the Obesity Medicine Association leadership.
RESULTS
Topics in this CPS include obesity, thrombosis, venous disease, lymphatic disease, and lipedema. Obesity increases the risk of thrombosis and cardiovascular disease via fat mass and adiposopathic mechanisms. Treatment of thrombosis or thrombotic risk includes healthful nutrition, physical activity, and the requisite knowledge of how body weight affects anti-thrombotic medications. In addition to obesity-related thrombotic considerations of acute coronary syndrome and ischemic non-hemorrhagic stroke, this Clinical Practice Statement briefly reviews the diagnosis and management of clinically relevant presentations of deep vein thromboses, pulmonary embolism, chronic venous stasis, varicose veins, superficial thrombophlebitis, lipodermatosclerosis, corona phlebectatica, chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension, iliofemoral venous obstruction, pelvic venous disorder, post-thrombotic syndrome, as well as lymphedema and lipedema - which should be included in the differential diagnosis of other edematous or enlargement disorders of the lower extremities.
CONCLUSIONS
This Obesity Medicine Association (OMA) Clinical Practice Statement (CPS) on obesity, thrombosis, and venous/lymphatic disease is one of a series of OMA CPSs designed to assist clinicians in the care of patients with the disease of obesity.
PubMed: 38125656
DOI: 10.1016/j.obpill.2023.100092 -
Radiology Case Reports Aug 2022On December 2020, the US Food and Drug Administration issued the first emergency use authorization for a vaccine for the prevention of coronavirus disease 2019...
On December 2020, the US Food and Drug Administration issued the first emergency use authorization for a vaccine for the prevention of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). We report development of superficial thrombophlebitis in the ipsilateral breast of a 43-year-old female 7 days after receiving the first dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine. Given that this is the first case of superficial thrombophlebitis in the breast shortly after mRNA vaccination for COVID-19 reported to our knowledge, we suggest that this may be a rare vaccine-related event.
PubMed: 35711742
DOI: 10.1016/j.radcr.2022.05.018 -
Anesthesia, Essays and Researches 2019The association of superficial thrombophlebitis (ST) with deep-venous thrombosis varies between 6% and 44%. Thus, prevention of ST is important. The aim of this study...
Comparison of Heparin Quick Penetrating Solution and Diclofenac Quick Penetrating Solution for the Prevention of Superficial Thrombophlebitis Caused by Peripheral Venous Cannulation: A Randomized Double-Blind Study.
BACKGROUND AND AIMS
The association of superficial thrombophlebitis (ST) with deep-venous thrombosis varies between 6% and 44%. Thus, prevention of ST is important. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of topical quick penetrating solution (QPS) of heparin 1000 IU/mL versus diclofenac QPS for prevention of postinfusion ST.
SETTINGS AND DESIGN
This is a randomized, controlled, double-blind study.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
The study was done after ethical clearance and Clinical Trial Registry- India registration to compare 100 patients for the prevention of ST with application of heparin QPS and diclofenac QPS at regular intervals. Patients were randomized into two groups (Group H [control group] - heparin QPS group and Group D - diclofenac QPS group) and the assigned treatment was applied four times daily. The appearance of thrombophlebitis was graded on the basis of infusion nursing society scale. The site of venous cannulation was inspected every 6 h for any changes for the next 5 days.
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS
The parametric data were analyzed using Student's -test and nonparametric data were analyzed by Kruskal-Wallis test.
RESULTS
Of 98, only 10 patients developed thrombophlebitis and all belonged to Group D (23%). No patient belonging to Group H developed thrombophlebitis (0%). This difference was statistically significant ( = 0.034).
CONCLUSION
The QPS formulation of heparine and diclofenac was effective in preventing thrombophlebitis. Heparine QPS is more effective than diclofenac QPS for the same.
PubMed: 31031497
DOI: 10.4103/aer.AER_189_18