A state-of-the-art review of quality-of-life assessment in venous disease

OBJECTIVE

Chronic venous disease is a common condition and has a significant impact on patients' health status. Validated patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) used to assess health status are needed to measure health status. This state-of-the-art review summarizes the current validation evidence for disease-specific PROMs for chronic venous disease and provides a framework for their use in the clinical setting.

METHODS

A literature search in OVID Embase and Medline was conducted to identify relevant English-language studies of chronic venous disease that used disease-specific PROMs between January 1, 1993, and June 30, 2022. Abstracts and titles from identified studies were screened by four investigators, and full-text articles were subsequently screened for eligibility. Data on validation of disease-specific PROMs was abstracted from each included article. Classical test theory was used as a framework to examine a priori defined validation criteria for content validity, reliability (construct validity, internal reliability, and test-retest reliability), responsiveness, and expansion of the validation evidence base (use in randomized controlled trials and comparative effectiveness research, cultural or linguistic translations, predictive validity, or establishing the minimal clinically important difference threshold, defined as smallest amount an outcome or measure is perceived as a meaningful change to patients). The PROMs were categorized into three groups based on the manifestations of disease of the population for which they were developed. The overall validity of each PROM was assessed across three stages of validation including content validity (phase 1); construct validity, reliability, and responsiveness (phase 2); and expansion of the validation evidence base (phase 3).

RESULTS

Of 2338 unique studies screened, 112 studies (4.8%) met inclusion criteria. The eight disease-specific PROMs identified were categorized into three groups: (1) overall chronic venous disease (C1 to C6); (2) C1 to C4 disease; and (3) C5 to C6 disease. Assessed by group, the Chronic Venous Insufficiency Questionnaire met criteria for validation at all three phases for patients with C1 to C4 disease, and the Charing Cross Venous Ulcer Questionnaire met criteria for validation at all three phases for patients with C5 to C6 disease. There were no PROMs that met all criteria for validation for use in overall chronic venous disease (C1 to C6).

CONCLUSIONS

Of the eight PROMs assessed in this review, only two met prespecified criteria at each phase for validation. The Chronic Venous Insufficiency Questionnaire and Charing Cross Venous Ulcer Questionnaire should be considered for use in patients with chronic venous disease without venous ulcers and with venous ulcers, respectively.

Brazilian guidelines on chronic venous disease of the Brazilian Society of Angiology and Vascular Surgery

The Brazilian Society of Angiology and Vascular Surgery has set up a committee to provide new evidence-based recommendations for patient care associated with chronic venous insufficiency. Topics were divided in five groups: 1. Classification, 2. Diagnosis, 3. Conservative or non-invasive treatment, 4. Invasive treatment and 5. Treatment of small vessels. This last series is closely related to the activities of Brazilian angiologists and vascular surgeons, who are heavily involved in the treatment of small superficial veins. These guidelines are intended to assist in clinical decision-making for attending physicians and health managers. The decision to follow a guideline recommendation should be made by the responsible physician on a case-by-case basis taking into account the patient's specific condition, as well as local resources, regulations, laws, and clinical practice recommendations.

Rate of saphenous vein occlusion and side effects at 1 year follow up after 1470 nm endolaser

Background

Use of endolaser for chronic venous disease involves choosing the laser wavelength and optical fiber to use and the quantity of energy to be administered. Efficacy is assessed by the venous occlusion rate and safety is evaluated in terms of side effects.

Objectives

To determine the incidence of total post-endolaser saphenous vein occlusion at 1-year follow-up. To describe side effects and their incidence and rates of reintervention or supplementary treatment during the postoperative period.

Methods

A retrospective, observational cohort study with a quantitative approach, enrolling patients with saphenous vein incompetence treated with intravenous 1,470 nm laser ablation. Data were input to an MS Excel 2019 spreadsheet, calculating means and standard deviations with the software's Power Query supplement.

Results

38 patients and 104 venous segments were eligible for the study. 100% were occluded at 30 days and 99.04% were still occluded at 1 year after the procedure. Mean Linear Endovenous Energy Density administered to the internal saphenous vein was 2,040.52 W/cm/s with standard deviation of ± 1,510.06 W/cm/s and 1,168.4 W/cm/s with standard deviation of ± 665.011 W/cm/s was administered to the external saphenous vein. Pain along the saphenous path was the most common side effect, with eight cases (21.05%), followed by one case of paresthesia (2.63%).

Conclusions

The total occlusion rate at 1-year follow-up suggests the technique is promising and is currently applicable in this sample. The incidence of pain and paresthesia may be caused by the high mean energy delivered in some cases. It is recommended that multicenter studies be conducted with larger and more uniform samples in terms of their Clinical-Etiological-Anatomical-Pathological classifications.

A network meta-analysis on the efficacy and safety of thermal and nonthermal endovenous ablation treatments

OBJECTIVE

We assessed the mid-term efficacy and safety of thermal and nonthermal endovenous ablation for the treatment of lower limb superficial venous insufficiency.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review in accordance with the PRISMA (preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses) statement and a Bayesian network meta-analysis. The primary end points were great saphenous vein (GSV) closure and venous clinical severity score (VCSS) improvement. A meta-regression using GSV diameter as a covariate was undertaken for the two primary end points.

RESULTS

We included 14 studies and 4177 patients, with a mean follow-up of 25.7 months. Radiofrequency ablation (RFA; odds ratio [OR], 3.99; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.82-10.53), cyanoacrylate ablation (CAC; OR, 3.09; 95% CI, 1.35-8.37), and endovenous laser ablation (EVLA; OR, 2.72; 95% CI, 1.23-7.38) displayed increased odds for GSV closure compared with mechanochemical ablation (MOCA). MOCA inferiority compared with RFA (mean difference [MD], 0.96; 95% CI, 0.71-1.20), EVLA (MD, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.61-1.24), and CAC (MD, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.65-1.15) was also depicted regarding VCSS improvement. EVLA resulted in an increased risk of postoperative paresthesia compared with MOCA (risk ratio [RR], 9.61; 95% CI, 2.32-62.29), CAC (RR, 7.90; 95% CI, 2.44-38.16), and RFA (RR, 6.96; 95% CI, 2.31-28.04). Although the overall analysis identified nonstatistically significant differences for Aberdeen varicose vein questionnaire score improvement, thrombophlebitis, ecchymosis, and pain, further investigation revealed an increase pain profile for EVLA at 1470 nm compared with RFA (MD, 3.22; 95% CI, 0.93-5.47) and CAC (MD, 3.04; 95% CI, 1.05-4.97). A sensitivity analysis displayed a persistent underperformance of MOCA compared with RFA (OR, 4.33; 95% CI, 1.15-55.54) for GSV closure and both RFA (MD, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.22-1.77) and CAC (MD, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.08-1.65) regarding VCCS improvement. Although no regression model reached statistical significance, the GSV closure regression model revealed a trend for considerably decreased efficacy for both CAC and MOCA with larger GSV diameters compared with RFA and EVLA.

CONCLUSIONS

Although our analysis has produced skepticism regarding the efficacy of MOCA in the mid-term period for VCSS improvement and GSV closure rates, CAC showed equivalent results compared with both RFA and EVLA. Additionally, CAC displayed a decreased risk of postprocedural paresthesia and pigmentation and induration compared with EVLA. Also, both RFA and CAC had an improved pain profile compared with EVLA 1470 nm. The potential underperformance of nonthermal, nontumescent ablation modalities in ablating large GSVs necessitates further research.

Strategies and challenges in treatment of varicose veins and venous insufficiency

Patients with varicose veins can be treated with conservative or surgical approaches based on the clinical conditions and patient preferences. In the recent decade, the recommendations for managing symptomatic varicose veins have changed dramatically due to the rise of minimally invasive endovascular techniques. The literature was systematically searched on Medline without language restrictions. All papers on the treatment of varicose veins and venous insufficiency with different procedures were included and reviewed. Endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) both are same safe and effective in terms of occlusion rate, and time to return to normal activity. In comparison with RFA or EVLT, Cure conservatrice et Hemodynamique de l'Insufficience Veineuse en Ambulatoire (CHIVA) may cause more bruising and make little or no difference to rates of limb infection, superficial vein thrombosis, nerve injury, or hematoma. In terms of recurrence of varicose veins, there is little or no difference between CHIVA and stripping, RFA, or EVLT. Great saphenous vein recanalization is highest in the ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy (FS) group (51%) during 1 year of follow-up. The 2013 National Institute for Health and Care Excellence clinical guidelines recommend surgery as a third-line therapeutic option after EVLA or RFA and sclerotherapy. Although the mechanochemical endovenous ablation (MOCA) is a non-thermal, non-tumescent option and appears to be of similar efficacy to stab avulsion with no potential risk of nerve damage, the overall success rate of MOCA is lower than those of other procedures such as EVLA, RFA, or high ligation and stripping. EVLA is the most cost-effective therapeutic option, with RFA being a close second for the treatment of patients with varicose veins. Endovenous thermal ablation (EVLA or RFA) is recommended as a first-line treatment for varicose veins and has substituted the high ligation of saphenofemoral junctional reflux and stripping of varicose veins. Ultrasound-guided FS is associated with a high recurrence rate and can be used in conjunction with other procedures. MOCA and cyanoacrylate embolization appear promising, but evidence of their effectiveness is required.

A prospective multicentre 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

BACKGROUND

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).

METHODS

A prospective multicentre 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.

RESULTS

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.

CONCLUSIONS

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.

A Randomized Controlled Trial of Endovenous Laser Ablation Versus Mechanochemical Ablation With ClariVein in the Management of Superficial Venous Incompetence (LAMA Trial)

OBJECTIVE

This RCT compares the clinical, technical and quality of life outcomes after EVLA and MOCA.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Thermal ablation is the current mainstay treatment for SVI. Newer nonthermal methods of treatment have been developed which do not require the use of tumescent anesthesia. The potential advantages of these newer methods should be tested in RCTs to ascertain their role in the future treatments of SVI.

METHODS

This single-center RCT enrolled patients with symptomatic, unilateral, single-axis SVI. Eligible patients were equally randomized to either EVLA or MOCA, both with concomitant phlebectomy when necessary. The joint primary outcomes were intraprocedural axial ablation pain scores and anatomical occlusion at 1 year. Secondary outcomes included postprocedural pain, venous clinical severity score (VCSS), quality of life (Aberdeen varicose veins questionnaire and EuroQol 5-domain utility index), patient satisfaction and complication rates.

RESULTS

One hundred fifty patients were randomized equally between the 2 interventions. Both groups reported low intraprocedural pain scores; on a 100 mm visual analog scale, pain during axial EVLA was 22 (9-44) compared to 15 (9-29) during MOCA; P = 0.210. At 1 year, duplex derived anatomical occlusion rates after EVLA were 63/69 (91%) compared to 53/69 (77%) in the MOCA group; P = 0.020. Both groups experienced significant improvement in VCSS and AVVQ after treatment, without a significant difference between groups. Median VCSS improved from 6 (5-8) to 0 (0-1) at one year; P < 0.001. Median AVVQ improved from 13.8 (10.0-17.7) to 2.0 (0.0-4.9); P < 0.001. One patient in the MOCA group experienced DVT.

CONCLUSIONS

Both EVLA and MOCA were highly efficacious in treating SVI; patients improved significantly in terms of disease severity, symptoms, and QoL. Both resulted in low procedural pain with a short recovery time. Axial occlusion rates were higher after EVLA. Long term follow-up is warranted to assess the effect of recanalization on the rate of clinical recurrence.

Interventions for great saphenous vein reflux: network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

BACKGROUND

A variety of endovascular and open surgical interventions exist to treat great saphenous vein reflux. However, comparisons of treatment outcomes have been inconsistent.

METHODS

A systematic review and network meta-analysis of RCTs was performed to compare rates of incomplete stripping or non-occlusion of the great saphenous vein with or without reflux (anatomical failure) at early, mid- and long-term follow-up; and secondary outcomes (reintervention and clinical recurrence) among intervention groups. The surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) method was used to estimate the probability of the intervention with the lowest anatomical failure rates.

RESULTS

Some 72 RCTs were included. Comparisons of endothermal techniques with open surgery were mostly not significantly different, except for endovenous laser ablation (EVLA), which had higher long-term anatomical failure rates (pooled risk ratio (RR) 1.87, 95 per cent c.i. 1.14 to 3.07). Mechanochemical ablation had higher anatomical failure rates than radiofrequency ablation (RFA) (pooled RR 2.77, 1.38 to 5.53), and cyanoacrylate closure (CAC) had a RR 0.56 (0.34 to 0.93) times lower than either RFA or EVLA at the early term. Ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy had a higher risk of anatomical failure and reintervention than open surgery, with the lowest SUCRA value, and CAC was ranked first, third and first for best intervention for anatomical failure at early, mid and long term respectively. However, clinical recurrence rates were not significantly different between all comparisons.

CONCLUSION

Mechanochemical ablation and ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy performed poorly, with higher anatomical failure rates in the long term. The other treatment modalities had similar rates of anatomical failure in the short and mid term.

Endovenous laser ablation of incompetent great saphenous veins with 1470-nm laser using bare tip and radial fibers results in similar short-term outcomes

OBJECTIVE

The common side effects of endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) are pain and discomfort in the treated leg. We compared the pain and outcomes after EVLA using a 1470-nm laser with bare tip or radial fibers in the treatment of incompetent great saphenous veins (GSVs).

METHODS

A total of 86 patients with primary varicose veins of the GSV were randomized to treatment using a 1470-nm laser and bare fiber (BF; n = 43) or radial fiber (RF; n = 43) during a 12-month period from January to December 2019. Patients were assessed clinically and using venous Doppler ultrasonography at 24 hours, 1 week, and 1 month. The periprocedural parameters and short-term outcomes of pain after the procedure, improvement in the Venous Clinical Severity Score (VCSS), and vein occlusion at 1 month were compared and analyzed.

RESULTS

The linear endovenous energy density (65.7 J/cm vs 65.2 J/cm), tumescent local anesthetic solution used (627.4 mL vs 661.4 mL), treated GSV length, and number of hook phlebectomies were similar in both groups. The pain score at 8 hours (2.77 vs 2.70) and 1 week (2.81 vs 2.74) were similar in the BF and RF groups, respectively. The improvement in the VCSS was significant in both groups and was slightly better in the BF group, although the difference was not statistically significant. Both fiber types had 100% efficacy in terms of closure of the treated vein at 1 month.

CONCLUSIONS

EVLA using a 1470-nm laser with a BF had similar outcomes in the short term compared with a RF of the same wavelength. Both fibers were associated with significant improvement in the VCSS at 1 month.

Histopathologic differences in the endovenous laser ablation between jacketed and radial fibers, in an ex vivo dominant extrafascial tributary of the great saphenous vein in an in vitro model, using histology and immunohistochemistry

OBJECTIVE

The study aimed to investigate the biologic effects of the 1470-nm endovenous laser (EVL), with a jacketed fiber and a radial fiber, during EVL ablation of an ex vivo dominant extrafascial tributary of the great saphenous vein in our in vitro model by histology and immunohistochemistry.

METHODS

Ten segments of the dominant extrafascial tributary of the great saphenous vein were harvested by a consultant vascular surgeon from patients during routine varicose vein surgery. Six segments were treated using an ex vivo model of our design by a 1470-nm EVL with a jacketed fiber. The other four segments were also treated by a 1470-nm EVL but with a radial-firing fiber. Each segment was split into five sections and treated at five different linear endovenous energy densities (LEEDs) at 10 W: 0, 20, 40, 60, and 80 J/cm. The veins were incubated and subsections collected at 6 and 24 hours after treatment. Subsections were immersed in buffered formalin and taken for histologic and immunohistochemical analysis. Histopathologic analysis was then performed.

RESULTS

Treatment with the radial fiber led to a pattern of damage that was more homogeneous than with the jacketed fiber, with no carbonization of tissue present. Significant transmural damage and necrosis were observed at LEEDs of 60 and 80 J/cm in both treatment groups. At the same LEEDs, p53 and caspase 3 analysis showed that transmural cell wall vein death (necrosis or apoptosis) occurred by 6 hours after treatment with both fibers.

CONCLUSIONS

There was a significant difference in the effects of treatment with a jacketed fiber and a radial fiber in EVL ablation in vitro. Although both fibers caused transmural vein wall cell death at similar LEEDs, the pattern of damage with the radial fiber was more homogeneous. There was no overtreatment of tissue in terms of carbonization after treatment with the radial fiber. Treatment with the jacketed fiber showed carbonization of tissue at the same LEEDs.

Optimization of endovenous laser coagulation: in vivo experiments

Finding optimal parameters of endovenous laser coagulation using the radiation with a wavelength of 1910 nm. In vivo experiments have been carried out on the small saphenous veins of three sheep of Edilbay breed and the dependence of venous wall and surrounding tissue damage on the radiation power was analyzed on the basis of morphological study results, as well as ultrasound examination and clinical observation of animals in the postoperative period. As radiation source, we used the diode-pumped solid-state laser, based on the LiYF₄:Tm crystal, with emission wavelength of 1910 nm. For morphological study, veins were harvested immediately and 40 days after operation. Histological analysis of the vein after treatment with 1.5-W radiation revealed asymmetric wall injury and a thrombus formation in the lumen. The blood thrombus formation and pronounced vein wall damage was observed after treatment with 3-W radiation. Perivenous tissue injury is insignificant and does not lead to postoperative complications as in the case of using 1.5-W radiation. Increasing the radiation power to 4 W results in the total vein wall destruction and the thrombus formation, which persists for 40 days after the procedure. Based on the results of clinical observations of animals with registration of skin wound healing, as well as the results of histological examination of veins harvested immediately after the EVLC and 40 days after, it was concluded that the laser power value of 3-4 W can be recommended for use in the clinic.

Commonly Used Endovenous Laser Ablation (EVLA) Parameters Do Not Influence Efficacy: Results of a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to summarise available randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of EVLA efficacy, and to define the differences in success rate of variations in wavelength, administered energy, outcome definition, and follow up period.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted in Embase, Medline (Ovid-SP), Cochrane Central Database, and Web of Science from inception to November 2017. RCTs with follow up of more than three months were included. The studied outcome was the proportion of patients with EVLA treatment success, defined as absence of reflux or occlusion of the great saphenous vein (GSV). Pooled proportions of anatomical success were compared. Subgroup and meta-regression analysis included wavelengths (short [810, 940, and 980 nm], long [1470, 1500, and 1920 nm]), amount of energy (≤50 J/cm, > 50 J/cm), follow up (≤1 year, > 1 year), outcome definition (occlusion, no reflux), and quality of the studies (low risk of bias, unclear/high risk of bias).

RESULTS

Twenty-eight RCTs, with a total of 2829 GSVs were included. The overall success rate of EVLA was 92% (95% CI 90-94%, I² = 68%). In subgroup analysis, no statistically significant differences were found for long or short wavelengths (95% [95% CI 91-97%] vs. 92% [95% CI 89-94%], p = .15), high or low administered energy (93% [95% CI 89-95%] vs. 92% [95% CI 90-94%], p = .99), long or short follow up (89% [95% CI 84-93%] vs. 93% [95% CI 91-95%], p = .13) and outcome definition (occlusion group 94% [95% CI 91-96%] vs. absence of reflux group 91% [95% CI 87-94%], p = .26). Studies with low risk of bias reported a significantly higher success rate than high or unclear risk of bias (93% [95% CI 90-95%] vs. 89% [95% CI 83-93%], p = .04).

CONCLUSIONS

The overall success rate of EVLA is high (92%), even with increasing follow up. Commonly used parameters of EVLA (wavelength, administered energy, and outcome definition) have no influence on the treatment success rate.

Randomized clinical trial of endovenous laser ablation versus direct and indirect radiofrequency ablation for the treatment of great saphenous varicose veins

Background

The current treatment strategy for many patients with varicose veins is endovenous thermal ablation. The most common forms of this are endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA). However, at present there is no clear consensus on which of these treatments is superior. The objective of this study was to compare EVLA with two forms of RFA: direct RFA (dRFA; radiofrequency‐induced thermotherapy) and indirect RFA (iRFA; VNUS ClosureFast™).

Methods

Patients with symptomatic great saphenous vein (GSV) incompetence were randomized to receive EVLA, dRFA or iRFA. Patients were followed up at 2 weeks, 6 and 12 months. The primary outcome was GSV occlusion rate. Secondary outcomes included Venous Clinical Severity Score (VCSS), Aberdeen Varicose Vein Questionnaire (AVVQ) score and adverse events.

Results

Some 450 patients received the allocated treatment (EVLA, 148; dRFA, 152; iRFA, 150). The intention‐to‐treat analysis showed occlusion rates of 75·0 (95 per cent c.i. 68·0 to 82·0), 59·9 (52·1 to 67·7) and 81·3 (75·1 to 87·6) per cent respectively after 1 year (P = 0·007 for EVLA versus dRFA, P < 0·001 for dRFA versus iRFA, P = 0·208 for EVLA versus iRFA). VCSS improved significantly for all treatments with no significant differences between them. AVVQ scores also improved significantly for all treatments, but iRFA had significantly better scores than dRFA at 12 months. Significantly more adverse events were reported after treatment with EVLA (103) than after dRFA (61) and iRFA (65), especially more pain.

Conclusion

Primary GSV occlusion rates were better after iRFA and EVLA than dRFA. All three interventions were effective in improving the clinical severity of varicose veins at 1 year.

Effects of Two Current Great Saphenous Vein Thermal Ablation Methods on Visual Analog Scale and Quality of Life

Background

The aim of the study is to compare the current two endovenous thermal ablation methods by examining the effects on the visual analog scale (VAS) and the short form-36® quality of life index.

Methods

Ninety-six patients who underwent unilateral endovenous thermal ablation of great saphenous vein were included. ClosureFast™ catheters were used in the RFA group and 1470 nm radial fiber laser catheters were used in the EVLA group.

Results

The RFA group consisted of 41 patients and the EVLA group consisted of 55 patients. The preoperative baseline characteristics of both groups were similar. On the day of operation, VAS values were 2.8 ± 1.1 in the RFA group and 3.6 ± 1.8 in the EVLA group (p = 0.02). Comparisons of short form-36 parameters in both groups showed them to be similar except the pain detected at postoperative 1st week (48.1 ± 5.4 for RFA, 44.9 ± 7.6 for EVLA, p = 0.04).

Conclusion

Results in postprocedural quality of life were found to be similar in both of the techniques. However, in terms of postoperative pain, radiofrequency ablation is still superior to the 1470 nm radial fiber laser catheters.

Predictors of Recanalization of the Great Saphenous Vein in Randomized Controlled Trials 1 Year After Endovenous Thermal Ablation

OBJECTIVE/BACKGROUND

The objective was to identify predictors to develop and validate a prognostic model of recanalization of the great saphenous vein (GSV) in patients treated with endovenous thermal ablation (EVTA).

METHODS

The search strategy of Siribumrungwong was updated between August 2011 and August 2014 using MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane register to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs), in which patients presenting with GSV reflux were treated with radiofrequency or endovenous laser ablation. Leg level data (n = 1226) of 15/23 selected RCTs were pooled. The primary outcome was recanalization of the GSV; the secondary outcome was change in health related quality of life (HRQoL) measured by the Chronic Venous Insufficiency quality of life Questionnaire or Aberdeen Varicose Vein Questionnaire 1 year post-procedure. Candidate predictors were age, sex, body mass index, clinical class, GSV diameter, saphenofemoral junction reflux, type of device, energy, and length of treated vein.

RESULTS

At 1 year, 130 GSVs were recanalized (11%). Clinical class (odds ratio [OR] 2.1, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.4-3.3) and diameter (OR 1.8, 95% CI 1.2-2.7) of the GSV were the strongest predictors of recanalization. Other predictors included in the final model were sex, type of device, and length of treated vein. The performance of the recanalization model was moderate, with an area under the curve above 0.717. GSV diameter, type of device, and amount of energy delivered were the only predictors of the change of HRQoL. None of the candidate predictors were included in the final HRQoL model (R(2) = .027).

CONCLUSION

There are several important prognostic factors for GSV recanalization and change of HRQoL after EVTA. However, the performance of each model was unsatisfactory to allow use in clinical practice yet.