-
Journal of Vascular Surgery. Venous and... Jul 2022Incompetent perforator veins (IPVs) contribute to venous pathology and are surgically treated based on hemodynamic measurements, size, and the CEAP (Clinical,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
Incompetent perforator veins (IPVs) contribute to venous pathology and are surgically treated based on hemodynamic measurements, size, and the CEAP (Clinical, Etiological, Anatomical, and Pathophysiological) classification. The objective of the present study was to systematically review and synthesize the current literature regarding the surgical management of IPVs, including open ligation, subfascial endoscopic perforator surgery (SEPS), endovascular laser ablation, ultrasound-guided sclerotherapy, and radiofrequency ablation.
METHODS
English-language literature reported before November 2021 was reviewed from the PubMed, EMBASE, and MEDLINE databases for primary studies reporting safety and efficacy outcomes in the surgical treatment of IPVs. Study quality and risk of bias were assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool for comparative studies and a modified version of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for noncomparative studies. A random effects model was used to pool the effect sizes for efficacy outcomes of wound healing and freedom from wound recurrence.
RESULTS
A total of 81 studies were included for qualitative synthesis, representing 7010 patients, with a mean age of 54.7 years. The overall evidence quality was low to intermediate, with a moderate to high risk of bias in the comparative studies. An 11.3% complication rate was found across the interventions, with no reported incidence of stroke or air embolism. Regarding efficacy, the pooled estimates for short-term (≤1 year) wound healing were 99.9% for ultrasound-guided sclerotherapy (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.81%-1%), 72.2% for open ligation (95% CI, 0.04%-0.94%), and 96.0% for SEPS (95% CI, 0.79%-0.99%). For short-term freedom from wound recurrence, the pooled estimate for SEPS was 91.0% (95% CI, 0.3%-0.99%).
CONCLUSIONS
The current evidence regarding the treatment of IPVs is limited owing to the low adherence to reporting standards in the observational studies and the lack of randomization, blinding, and allocation concealment in the comparative studies. Additional comparative studies are needed to guide clinical decision-making regarding the invasive treatment options for IPVs.
Topics: Humans; Middle Aged; Sclerotherapy; Treatment Outcome; Varicose Veins; Vascular Surgical Procedures; Veins; Venous Insufficiency
PubMed: 35217217
DOI: 10.1016/j.jvsv.2021.12.088 -
Journal of the European Academy of... Feb 2023Skin hyperpigmentation after sclerotherapy with polidocanol-containing sclerosants is a common local side effect. Sclerotherapists should be familiar with factors that... (Review)
Review
Skin hyperpigmentation after sclerotherapy with polidocanol-containing sclerosants is a common local side effect. Sclerotherapists should be familiar with factors that trigger hyperpigmentation after sclerotherapy with polidocanol-containing sclerosants. A systematic literature review of works reporting hyperpigmentation after sclerotherapy for telangiectasias, reticular veins, side branches and truncal varices with polidocanol-containing sclerosants was performed. Reported incidence rates, follow-up periods and potentially triggering factors were assessed and analysed. The search yielded 1687 results; of these, 27 reports met the inclusion criteria. The incidence of hyperpigmentation seemed to increase with higher concentrations of polidocanol and was more evident after sclerotherapy for epifascial veins than for intrafascial truncal veins when the polidocanol concentration was more than 0.25%. Regarding sclerotherapy for telangiectasias and reticular veins, the incidence of hyperpigmentation ranged between 2% and 25% for polidocanol 0.25% (liquid and foam), between 12.5% and 67.9% for polidocanol 0.5% (liquid and foam) and between 13% and 73% for polidocanol 1% (liquid and foam). Regarding truncal veins, the incidence ranged from 7% to 45.8% for polidocanol 1% (liquid and foam), from 16% to 17% for polidocanol 2% (foam) and from 7.4% to 32.5% for polidocanol 3% (liquid and foam). Regarding the treatment of side branches, the incidence of hyperpigmentation ranged from 5.6% to 53% for both foam and liquid sclerotherapy. Regarding the duration of hyperpigmentation, there are few data describing reticular veins and telangiectasias. Hyperpigmentation persisting for more than 6 months has been reported to have an incidence of up to 7.5%. Hyperpigmentation persisting for more than 1 year after foam polidocanol 1%-3% treatment for truncal veins has an incidence ranging from 8.1% to 17.5%. Other factors such as higher volumes and compression therapy after treatment seem to have a minor influence. Data regarding hyperpigmentation after polidocanol-related sclerotherapy are poor and should be improved by higher-quality research.
Topics: Humans; Polidocanol; Sclerotherapy; Sclerosing Solutions; Varicose Veins; Polyethylene Glycols; Telangiectasis; Hyperpigmentation; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 36196455
DOI: 10.1111/jdv.18639 -
International Angiology : a Journal of... Oct 2023Presence of varices after operative treatment (PREVAIT) is a common finding after varicose vein surgery, and has been shown to significantly reduce the quality of life...
INTRODUCTION
Presence of varices after operative treatment (PREVAIT) is a common finding after varicose vein surgery, and has been shown to significantly reduce the quality of life of those it affects. As such, long-term results after varicose vein interventions have to be taken into account when choosing a technique. This study aims to systematically review current evidence on the recurrence of varicose veins after three different techniques: conventional surgery (HLS), endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA).
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
A literature search was performed on the PubMed and Web of Science databases, which returned 546 studies. Fourteen studies were included. Data were extracted using predefined forms.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
A total of 2795 patients were included, for a total of 3056 legs treated. 503 legs (16.5%) were treated by HLS, 1791 (58.6%) by EVLA and 762 (25.0%) by RFA. PREVAIT was reported in 34.4% for patients treated by HLS, for a mean follow-up comprised between 18 months and 5 years; 16.6% by EVLA, for a mean follow-up between 112 days and 5 years and 6.7% of those treated by RFA, for a mean follow-up between 106 days and 5 years. Regarding patterns of recurrence, the development of new varicose veins was the most commonly reported mechanism of recurrence after HLS (range: 29.8-91%) and EVLA (range: 40-81.6%), but not RFA, where recanalization of the occluded saphenous trunk accounted for up to 67.0% of the cases. Only one study reported quality of life related recurrence, and included patients treated by HLS and EVLA, but not RFA. Aberdeen Varicose Vein Questionnaire (AVVQ) score, physical functioning domains of the SF-36 score and patient satisfaction were significantly worse in patients with clinical recurrence. Re-intervention rates after recurrence were reported in 5 studies, ranging between 7.7% and 37.7% for HLS and 0-57.0% for EVLA. Only one study reported data on re-intervention for RFA patients, which was 6.67%.
CONCLUSIONS
Recurrence is a reliable indicator of long-term efficacy of a varicose vein treatment and appears to occur more frequently after HLS. Although there are several mechanisms of recurrence, the development of new varicose veins was the most commonly observed. There is clear heterogeneity among definitions of recurrence and follow-up periods in literature.
Topics: Humans; Quality of Life; Saphenous Vein; Recurrence; Varicose Veins; Laser Therapy; Catheter Ablation; Treatment Outcome; Venous Insufficiency
PubMed: 37795801
DOI: 10.23736/S0392-9590.23.05082-4 -
Phlebology Oct 2021To assess the clinical efficacy of sulodexide, including a comparison with venoactive drugs (VAD) (micronized purified flavonoid fraction, MPFF; hydroxy-ethyl-rutosides,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To assess the clinical efficacy of sulodexide, including a comparison with venoactive drugs (VAD) (micronized purified flavonoid fraction, MPFF; hydroxy-ethyl-rutosides, HR; calcium dobesilate;Ruscus extract combined with hesperidin methyl chalcone and vitamin C, Ruscus+HMC+VitC; horse chestnut seed extract, HCSE) and pentoxifylline in patients with chronic venous disease.
METHODS
We performed a literature search in MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies. Proportion of patients with complete venous ulcer healing was the primary outcome and lower leg volume, foot volume, ankle circumference and symptoms were the secondary outcomes. Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) was perfomed with random effects models using only RCTs. A meta-analysis of observational studies was performed for sulodexide because no RCT could be included in NMA for symptoms or signs.
RESULTS
Forty-five RCTs and eighteen observational studies were identified. Sulodexide was included only in a single NMA for the proportion of patients with complete ulcer healing and it showed to have the highest probability of being the best treatment (48%) compared with pentoxifylline (37%) and MPFF (16%). MPFF was the most effective treatment in reducing lower leg volume, CIVIQ-20 score and pain VAS scale while calcium dobesilate and Ruscus+HMC+VitC were the most effective in reducing foot volume and ankle circumference respectively.Meta-analyses of observational studies for sulodexide showed that it improves significantly the scoring of pain, feeling of swelling, heaviness and parasthesiae measured by Likert scales.
CONCLUSIONS
Sulodexide is at least as effective as pentoxifylline and more effective than MPFF in improving the rate of ulcer healing in patients with CVD. VADs are effective in improving venous symptoms and signs, as was also shown by sulodexide in the meta-analysis of observational studies. The relative effectiveness of sulodexide and VADs needs to be evaluated by an RCT in order to better inform clinical practice.
Topics: Glycosaminoglycans; Humans; Network Meta-Analysis; Pharmaceutical Preparations; Varicose Ulcer; Vascular Diseases
PubMed: 33983078
DOI: 10.1177/02683555211015020 -
Annals of Vascular Surgery Mar 2022Cyanoacrylate embolization (CAE) is a novel non-thermal non-tumescent venous ablation technique that has shown promising results in treating saphenous vein... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
Cyanoacrylate embolization (CAE) is a novel non-thermal non-tumescent venous ablation technique that has shown promising results in treating saphenous vein insufficiency. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety profile of CAE in comparison to endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) in treating saphenous vein insufficiency.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis in accordance with the PRISMA Statement. A systematic search was performed through online databases including PubMed, ScienceDirect, and Cochrane to find relevant studies. Manual searching was also performed from the references of the selected studies. Specific keywords that we used were "(cyanoacrylate) AND (laser OR laser ablation OR laser therapy) AND (vein OR venous OR saphenous vein OR venous insufficiency OR varicose vein)". Outcomes of interest were efficacy, safety, and intervention time. Efficacy was determined by venous closure rate 1 year post-intervention and Venous Clinical Severity Score (VCSS) 1 year post-intervention. Safety was determined by rates of periprocedural pain, skin pigmentation, nerve damage, phlebitis, deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and ecchymosis. Data extraction and quality assessment of included studies were performed by 2 reviewers, and statistical analysis was conducted using RevMan 5.4.0 software.
RESULTS
Five relevant articles (2 randomized-controlled trials and 3 cohort studies) were selected for this study, consisting a total of 1432 venous ablation procedures (710 CAE and 722 EVLA). From the efficacy point of view, venous closure rates and VCSS did not differ significantly between CAE group and EVLA group. From the safety point of view, pooled data showed that CAE group was associated with less periprocedural pain score (P < 0.001), lower skin pigmentation rates (0.60% vs. 4.46%; P = 0.008), and lower nerve damage rates (0% vs. 3.94%; P = 0.007). Rates of phlebitis, deep vein thrombosis, and ecchymosis did not differ significantly between the 2 groups. In addition, intervention time was significantly faster in CAE group compared to EVLA group (P < 0.001).
CONCLUSION
Cyanoacrylate embolization yields similar efficacy compared to EVLA. However, CAE is associated with less periprocedural pain, lower occurrence rates of skin pigmentation and nerve damage, and faster intervention time.
Topics: Cyanoacrylates; Embolization, Therapeutic; Humans; Laser Therapy; Operative Time; Postoperative Complications; Saphenous Vein; Severity of Illness Index; Skin Pigmentation; Venous Insufficiency
PubMed: 34780939
DOI: 10.1016/j.avsg.2021.09.041 -
Phlebology Apr 2022To investigate and compare the outcomes of the available treatment modalities for anterior accessory saphenous vein (AASV) incompetence. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To investigate and compare the outcomes of the available treatment modalities for anterior accessory saphenous vein (AASV) incompetence.
METHODS
A systematic literature search was performed in MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library. Studies reporting the outcomes of patients who were treated for primary AASV incompetence were included. The methodologic quality of the articles was assessed using the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS). A random-effects model was used to estimate anatomic success, defined as AASV occlusion. The secondary outcomes were pain during and after treatment, venous clinical severity score, quality of life, esthetic result, time to return to daily activities, and complications.
RESULTS
The search identified 860 articles, of which 16 met the inclusion criteria. A total of 609 AASVs were reported. The included studies were of poor or moderate quality according to MINORS score. The pooled anatomic success rates were 91.8% after endovenous laser ablation and radiofrequency ablation (EVLA, RFA, 11 studies), 93.6% after cyanoacrylate closure (3 studies), and 79.8% after sclerotherapy (2 studies). The non-pooled anatomic success rate was 97.9% after phlebectomy and 82% after CHIVA. Paresthesia was seen after EVLA in 0.7% of patients (6 studies). Phlebitis was seen in 2.6% of patients after RFA (2 studies), 27% after sclerotherapy (1 study), and 12% after the phlebectomy (1 study). Deep venous thrombosis and skin burn did not occur.
CONCLUSION
Treatment of AASV incompetence is safe and effective. Despite limited evidence, occlusion of the AASV can be achieved with endovenous thermal ablation and cyanoacrylate. There does not appear to be a benefit of EVLA compared to RFA regarding treatment efficacy. Phlebectomy shows promising results if the saphenofemoral junction is competent. Lower results are seen after sclerotherapy and CHIVA. However, studies with sufficient sample sizes of solely treatment of AASV incompetence are needed to draw firm conclusions.
Topics: Humans; Laser Therapy; Quality of Life; Saphenous Vein; Sclerotherapy; Treatment Outcome; Varicose Veins; Venous Insufficiency
PubMed: 34965757
DOI: 10.1177/02683555211060998 -
JAMA Dermatology Jan 2022Psoriasis, venous thromboembolism (VTE), and peripheral vascular disease (PVD) share similar mechanisms involving chronic inflammation. However, the associations between... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
IMPORTANCE
Psoriasis, venous thromboembolism (VTE), and peripheral vascular disease (PVD) share similar mechanisms involving chronic inflammation. However, the associations between psoriasis and VTE or PVD are unclear.
OBJECTIVE
To determine the association of psoriasis with incident VTE and PVD.
DATA SOURCES
MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature were systematically searched for relevant publications from their respective inception through May 21, 2021. No restrictions on language or geographic locations were imposed.
STUDY SELECTION
Two authors independently selected cohort studies that investigated the risk for incident VTE or PVD in patients with psoriasis. Any discrepancy was resolved through discussion with 2 senior authors until reaching consensus. Only 13 initially identified studies met the selection criteria for qualitative review, and only 9 of these for quantitative analysis.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
The Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) reporting guideline was followed. Two authors independently extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies by using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Disagreements were resolved by discussion with 2 other authors. A random-effects model meta-analysis was conducted to calculate the pooled hazard ratios (HRs) with the corresponding confidence intervals for incident VTE and PVD. Subgroup analyses based on arthritis status, psoriasis severity, sex, and geographic location were also performed.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
Hazard ratios for incident VTE and PVD associated with psoriasis.
RESULTS
A total of 13 cohort studies with 12 435 982 participants were included. The meta-analysis demonstrated a significantly increased risk for incident VTE (pooled HR, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.08-1.48) and PVD (pooled HR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.16-1.40) among patients with psoriasis. Subgroup analyses illustrated increased risk for incident VTE among participants with psoriatic arthritis (pooled HR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.01-1.53), women (pooled HR, 1.89; 95% CI, 1.36-2.61), and those in Asia (pooled HR, 2.02; 95% CI, 1.42-2.88) and Europe (pooled HR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.06-1.53).
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
This systematic review and meta-analysis found an increased risk for incident VTE and PVD among patients with psoriatic disease. Typical presentations of VTE or PVD should not be overlooked in patients with psoriasis. Risk factors, such as obesity, physical inactivity, smoking, and varicose veins, should be identified and treated in patients with psoriasis, and medications like hormone-related therapies should be prescribed with caution.
Topics: Europe; Female; Humans; Peripheral Vascular Diseases; Psoriasis; Risk Factors; Venous Thromboembolism
PubMed: 34851364
DOI: 10.1001/jamadermatol.2021.4918 -
BMJ Open Apr 2024A subset of patients with superficial venous thrombosis (SVT) experiences clot propagation towards deep venous thrombosis (DVT) and/or pulmonary embolism (PE). The aim... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Predictive factors of clot propagation in patients with superficial venous thrombosis towards deep venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolism: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
OBJECTIVE
A subset of patients with superficial venous thrombosis (SVT) experiences clot propagation towards deep venous thrombosis (DVT) and/or pulmonary embolism (PE). The aim of this systematic review is to identify all clinically relevant cross-sectional and prognostic factors for predicting thrombotic complications in patients with SVT.
DESIGN
Systematic review.
DATA SOURCES
PubMed/MEDLINE and Embase were systematically searched until 3 March 2023.
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
Original research studies with patients with SVT, DVT and/or PE as the outcome and presenting cross-sectional or prognostic predictive factors.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS OF RESULTS
The CHecklist for critical Appraisal and data extraction for systematic Reviews of prediction Modelling (CHARMS) checklist for prognostic factor studies was used for systematic extraction of study characteristics. Per identified predictive factor, relevant estimates of univariable and multivariable predictor-outcome associations were extracted, such as ORs and HRs. Estimates of association for the most frequently reported predictors were summarised in forest plots, and meta-analyses with heterogeneity were presented. The Quality in Prognosis Studies (QUIPS) tool was used for risk of bias assessment and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) for assessing the certainty of evidence.
RESULTS
Twenty-two studies were included (n=10 111 patients). The most reported predictive factors were high age, male sex, history of venous thromboembolism (VTE), absence of varicose veins and cancer. Pooled effect estimates were heterogenous and ranged from OR 3.12 (95% CI 1.75 to 5.59) for the cross-sectional predictor cancer to OR 0.92 (95% CI 0.56 to 1.53) for the prognostic predictor high age. The level of evidence was rated very low to low. Most studies were scored high or moderate risk of bias.
CONCLUSIONS
Although the pooled estimates of the predictors high age, male sex, history of VTE, cancer and absence of varicose veins showed predictive potential in isolation, variability in study designs, lack of multivariable adjustment and high risk of bias prevent firm conclusions. High-quality, multivariable studies are necessary to be able to identify individual SVT risk profiles.
PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER
CRD42021262819.
Topics: Humans; Male; Venous Thromboembolism; Cross-Sectional Studies; Risk Factors; Venous Thrombosis; Pulmonary Embolism; Neoplasms; Varicose Veins; Anticoagulants
PubMed: 38626964
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-074818 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Sep 2021Many surgical approaches are available to treat varicose veins secondary to chronic venous insufficiency. One of the least invasive techniques is the ambulatory... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Many surgical approaches are available to treat varicose veins secondary to chronic venous insufficiency. One of the least invasive techniques is the ambulatory conservative hemodynamic correction of venous insufficiency method (in French 'cure conservatrice et hémodynamique de l'insuffisance veineuse en ambulatoire' (CHIVA)), an approach based on venous hemodynamics with deliberate preservation of the superficial venous system. This is the second update of the review first published in 2013.
OBJECTIVES
To compare the efficacy and safety of the CHIVA method with alternative therapeutic techniques to treat varicose veins.
SEARCH METHODS
The Cochrane Vascular Information Specialist searched the Cochrane Vascular Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, AMED, and the World Health Organisation International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov trials registries to 19 October 2020. We also searched PUBMED to 19 October 2020 and checked the references of relevant articles to identify additional studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared CHIVA to other therapeutic techniques to treat varicose veins.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed and selected studies, extracted data, and performed quantitative analysis from the selected papers. A third author solved any disagreements. We assessed the risk of bias in included trials with the Cochrane risk of bias tool. We calculated the risk ratio (RR), mean difference (MD), number of people needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB), and the number of people needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH), with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We evaluated the certainty of the evidence using GRADE. The main outcomes of interest were the recurrence of varicose veins and side effects.
MAIN RESULTS
For this update, we identified two new additional studies. In total, we included six RCTs with 1160 participants (62% women) and collected from them eight comparisons. Three RCTs compared CHIVA with vein stripping. One RCT compared CHIVA with compression dressings in people with venous ulcers. The new studies included three comparisons, one compared CHIVA with vein stripping and radiofrequency ablation (RFA), and one compared CHIVA with vein stripping and endovenous laser therapy. We judged the certainty of the evidence for our outcomes as low to very low due to inconsistency, imprecision caused by the low number of events and risk of bias. The overall risk of bias across studies was high because neither participants nor personnel were blinded to the interventions. Two studies attempted to blind outcome assessors, but the characteristics of the surgery limited concealment. Five studies reported the outcome clinical recurrence of varicose veins with a follow-up of 18 months to 10 years. CHIVA may make little or no difference to the recurrence of varicose veins in the lower limb compared to stripping (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.46 to 1.20; 5 studies, 966 participants; low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether CHIVA reduced recurrence compared to compression dressing (RR 0.23, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.96; 1 study, 47 participants; very low-certainty evidence). CHIVA may make little or no difference to clinical recurrence compared to RFA (RR 2.02, 95% CI 0.74 to 5.53; 1 study, 146 participants; low-certainty evidence) and endovenous laser (RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.01 to 4.06; 1 study, 100 participants; low-certainty evidence). We found no clear difference between CHIVA and stripping for the side effects of limb infection (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.33 to 2.10; 3 studies, 746 participants; low-certainty evidence), and superficial vein thrombosis (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.51 to 2.17; 4 studies, 846 participants; low-certainty evidence). CHIVA may reduce slightly nerve injury (RR 0.14, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.98; NNTH 9, 95% CI 5 to 100; 4 studies, 846 participants; low-certainty evidence) and hematoma compared to stripping (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.97; NNTH 11, 95% CI 5 to 100; 2 studies, 245 participants; low-certainty evidence). For bruising, one study found no differences between groups while another study found reduced rates of bruising in the CHIVA group compared to the stripping group. Compared to RFA, CHIVA may make little or no difference to rates of limb infection, superficial vein thrombosis, nerve injury or hematoma, but may cause more bruising (RR 1.15, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.28; NNTH 8, CI 95% 5 to 25; 1 study, 144 participants; low-certainty evidence). Compared to endovenous laser, CHIVA may make little or no difference to rates of limb infection, superficial vein thrombosis, nerve injury or hematoma. The study comparing CHIVA versus compression did not report side effects.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There may be little or no difference in the recurrence of varicose veins when comparing CHIVA to stripping (low-certainty evidence), but CHIVA may slightly reduce nerve injury and hematoma in the lower limb (low-certainty evidence). Very limited evidence means we are uncertain of any differences in recurrence when comparing CHIVA with compression (very low-certainty evidence). CHIVA may make little or no difference to recurrence compared to RFA (low-certainty evidence), but may result in more bruising (low-certainty evidence). CHIVA may make little or no difference to recurrence and side effects compared to endovenous laser therapy (low-certainty evidence). However, we based these conclusions on a small number of trials with a high risk of bias as the effects of surgery could not be concealed, and the results were imprecise due to the low number of events. New RCTs are needed to confirm these results and to compare CHIVA with approaches other than open surgery.
Topics: Female; Humans; Laser Therapy; Male; Varicose Ulcer; Varicose Veins; Venous Insufficiency; Venous Thrombosis
PubMed: 34590305
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009648.pub4 -
Journal of Vascular Surgery. Venous and... Sep 2022Minimally invasive techniques have been increasingly used to treat pathologic perforator veins (PVs). The goal of the present study was to summarize the current... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
Minimally invasive techniques have been increasingly used to treat pathologic perforator veins (PVs). The goal of the present study was to summarize the current literature and determine the outcomes of treating PVs with or without the great saphenous vein/small saphenous vein using endovenous laser ablation (EVLA), radiofrequency ablation (RFA), and ultrasound-guided sclerotherapy (USGS).
METHODS
A systematic review of the literature on the percutaneous treatment of PVs (35 studies) was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA (preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses) guidelines. Studies reported up to March 2020 were included. The incidence of several end points at different follow-up periods were calculated according to the availability of data within 3 to 12 months after the index procedure.
RESULTS
Of the 35 studies, 15 (n = 1677) had reported on EVLA with or without sclerotherapy and/or microphlebectomy, 12 (n = 1477) had investigated the outcomes of RFA ablation with/without sclerotherapy, and 8 (n = 331) had investigated USGS alone. All techniques were safe in terms of periprocedural adverse events, with only a few complications occurring in each group. Immediate procedural success (within 30 days) was 95% in the EVLA group, 91% in the RFS group, and 58% to 70% in the USGS group. At 12 months of follow-up, the occlusion rates were 89%, 77%, and 83% in the EVLA, RFA, and USGS groups, respectively. The 12-month pooled estimate of ulcer healing between the EVLA and RFA groups was similar, although no direct comparisons were performed.
CONCLUSIONS
Treatment of PVs with percutaneous techniques, such as EVLA, RFA, and USGS, is safe and associated with high technical success. EVLA and RFA exhibited the most favorable outcomes. Additional research is needed to validate these results, which were based on the limited level of evidence available to better determine the most optimal treatment approach for lower limb pathologic PVs.
Topics: Catheter Ablation; Humans; Laser Therapy; Saphenous Vein; Sclerotherapy; Treatment Outcome; Varicose Veins; Venous Insufficiency
PubMed: 35364302
DOI: 10.1016/j.jvsv.2022.03.005