Thromboprophylaxis practice after outpatient endovenous thermal ablation

Continuation of anticoagulation through ambulatory phlebectomy does not impact postoperative bleeding risk

OBJECTIVES

Chronic anticoagulation for atrial fibrillation, a history of venous thromboembolism, and after heart valve replacement is often stopped or bridged for surgery. Our institutional practice is to continue anticoagulation through ambulatory phlebectomy (AP) procedures. As such, we aimed to compare postprocedure bleeding and major adverse events in patients on anticoagulation who received AP compared with patients not on anticoagulation.

METHODS

We included all patients who required AP from January 2016 to February 2023. Given the low frequency of chronic anticoagulation during the study period, as defined as patients on anticoagulation ≥30 days before index procedure and not held through the procedure, a propensity score match of 16 demographic parameters was performed to better match patients. After propensity matching, we compared the frequency and quality of postprocedural bleeding (none, incisional, large volume), extent of postprocedural ecchymosis (none, minimal, moderate, significant), and pain (minimal, moderate, severe) on follow-up examination with a provider. Thirty-day emergency department (ED) visits and major adverse cardiac events were also recorded for each patient. Continuous variables were compared using independent t tests or Mann-Whitney U tests, and categorical variables were compared using a χ2 or Fisher's exact test.

RESULTS

In total, 1853 patients received AP from four outpatient offices during the study period, 101 (5.5%) of whom were on chronic anticoagulation. Seventy patients for each group were propensity score matched in key demographics including age, gender, body mass index, Clinical-Etiology-Anatomy-Pathophysiology classification, prior vein procedures, concomitant laser procedures, number of phlebectomies performed, and comorbidities like history of deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, and peripheral arterial disease. There were no intraoperative major bleeding events. Patients on chronic anticoagulation were not more likely to have increased postprocedural bleeding (2.9% vs 0%; P > .05), significant ecchymosis (4.5% vs 1.5%; P = .671), severe pain on follow-up (1.4% vs 0%; P > .05), or increased likelihood of postprocedural cellulitis (1.4% vs 0%; P > .05). There were no instances of 30-day ED visits or major adverse cardiac events. Within patients on anticoagulation, use of rivaroxaban (8%) had higher incidence of bleeding than those on apixaban or warfarin (0%); however, these findings were not significant.

CONCLUSIONS

AP while continuing chronic anticoagulation did not result in an increased rate of bleeding, ED visits, or major adverse events. It is likely safe to continue anticoagulation throughout these outpatient procedures.

Complication rate with the 1940-nm versus 1470-nm wavelength laser

BackgroundWe hypothesized, that endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) with the highly water specific 1940-nm wavelength laser would reduce ablation-related thrombus extension (ARTE) incidence compared to the less specific 1470-nm laser.Materials and methodsBetween February 2017 to March 2023 we identified a consecutive series of patients undergoing EVLA from the prospectively ongoing VEINOVA registry. Patients were treated with the 1940-nm or 1470-nm laser. Demographic data and outcome data were used for this retrospective analysis.ResultsFrom a total of 3055 EVLA, 2006 procedures were performed with the1470-nm and 1049 with the 1940-nm laser. At 2-6 days follow- up visit (follow up visit 1), all ARTE occurred in 18 (0.9%) of all procedures with the 1470-nm and in 1 (0.1%) with the 1940-nm laser (p = 0.023). DVT was similar in both groups (0.3% vs 0.2%, p = 0.784). Phlebitis occurred in 67 (3.3%) of all procedures with the 1470-nm and in 2 (0.2%; p = 0.003) with the 1940-nm laser and paresthesia in 99 (4.9%) versus 5 (0.5%; p < 0.001), respectively. At 5-6 weeks follow-up (follow up visit 2), all ARTE occurred in 27 (1.4%) of all procedures with the 1470-nm and in 4 (0.4%; p = 0.010) with the 1940-nm laser. DVT was similar in both groups (0.7% vs 0.4%; p = 0.846). Phlebitis occurred in 97 (4.8%) of all procedures with the 1470-nm and in 9 (0.9%; p < 0.001) with the 1940-nm laser and paresthesia in 194 (9.7%) versus 35 (3.3%; p < 0.001), respectively. Occlusion rate was in both groups similar (99.8% vs 99.6%).ConclusionEVLA using the 1940-nm laser appears to be safe with lower ARTE incidence than using the 1470-nm laser. Phlebitis and paresthesia occurred less frequent with the 1940-nm than with the 1470-nm laser, thus favoring the use of the 1940-nm laser.

Thromboprophylaxis in varicose veins surgery: The everyday concern

Venous thromboembolic disease (VTE) occupies an important place as a cause of morbidity and mortality in surgical patients in all specialties. Despite the existence of guidelines for thrombo prophylaxis in surgery, it is not clear due to the lack of current evidence, how to develop antithrombotic prophylaxis in varicose vein surgery and many questions arise when the surgeon is faced with a patient to be operated on. A comprehensive review of the literature was conducted to examine the evidence about the prevention of the venous thromboembolism in varicose veins surgery patients, and aims to guide the reader through questions that arise in daily practice, discussing the different scenarios presented in the literature for the choice of the most appropriate prophylaxis for each case. The lack of conclusive literature determines that risk should be individualized using available scales and other procedure-related factors, so that the type and duration of prophylaxis can be determined on a case-by-case basis.

The trends in venous thromboembolism occurrence and prevention after minimally invasive varicose vein surgery

OBJECTIVES

To assess the trends of VTE occurrence and prevention in varicose vein surgery.

METHOD

The registry-based CAPSIVS trial (NCT03041805) analysis includes results in 1878 lower limbs. The primary outcome is a 28-day symptomatic or asymptomatic DVT revealed with duplex ultrasound.

RESULTS

Any DVT, including EHIT, was observed in 3.4%, while symptomatic in 0.5%. Prophylactic anticoagulation was administrated in 20.4% with LMWH (13.2%) or DOAC (7.1%) for patients with higher VTE risk but did not reduce the events rate. With propensity score matching DOACs were superior to LMWHs (1.5% vs 9.8%). Duration of anticoagulation was essential: the lowest incidence (4.2%) was associated with prophylaxis for up to 7 days, while a single LMWH injection resulted in a DVT rate of 8.8%. With individual VTE history, any anticoagulation duration appeared insufficient.

CONCLUSIONS

Prophylactic anticoagulation after varicose vein surgery should be based on the individual VTE risk and provided for ≥7-30 days.

Venous thrombosis following endovenous laser ablation with and without thromboprophylaxis

OBJECTIVE

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) occurs infrequently after endovenous laser ablation (EVLA). The purpose of this study was to assess the incidence of VTE after EVLA with and without pharmacologic prophylaxis.

METHODS

From October 2019 to March 2020, a series of consecutive patients from the prospectively maintained VEINOVA (vein occlusion with various techniques) registry was retrospectively analyzed. All the patients underwent EVLA with and without postoperative thromboprophylaxis. A 1470-nm laser wavelength with a radial fiber was used for EVLA. Concomitant phlebectomy or sclerotherapy of insufficient tributaries was allowed. Perivenous tumescence was applied with 1% Rapidocaine (lidocaine hydrochloride monohydrate; Sintetica SA). Ablation of varicose veins was performed by continuously drawing back the laser fiber at a power of 10 W, aiming for a linear endovenous energy delivery of 60 to 90 J/cm. Compression stockings were applied postoperatively, and the patients were advised to wear them for 1 week. Duplex ultrasound was performed at the 1- and 4-week follow-up visits to determine the occlusion rate and the occurrence of EHIT and VTE.

RESULTS

Overall, 249 patients were identified from the registry. Of the 249 patients, 26 were omitted because of treatment of recurrent varicose veins. Finally, 223 consecutive patients with 223 legs and 227 saphenous veins (159 great saphenous veins, 49 small saphenous veins, and 19 anterior accessory saphenous veins) were included in the final analysis. Their mean age was 58.1 ± 13.8 years, and 167 patients (73.1%) were women. The clinical CEAP (clinical, etiology, anatomy, pathophysiology) classification was C2 for 11 legs (4.9%), C3 for 123 legs (55.2%), C4a or C4b for 86 legs (38.6%), and C5 to C6 for 3 legs (1.4%). Thromboprophylaxis was given to 132 patients (59.2%) for 3 days (rivaroxaban 10 mg once daily to 130 patients [98.5%] and low-molecular-weight heparin to 2 patients [1.5%]). No thromboprophylaxis was administered to 91 patients (40.8%) after EVLA. The average treatment length was 34.2 ± 19.3 cm and the average diameter was 5.0 ± 1.3 mm. At 1 week of follow-up, no thrombotic event had occurred in either group. At 4 weeks of follow-up, one case of EHIT class 2 (1.1%) and one case of pulmonary embolism (1.1%) had occurred in the group without thromboprophylaxis. In the thromboprophylaxis group, one deep vein thrombosis (0.8%) event had occurred (adjusted P = .135). At 1 and 4 weeks of follow-up, the treated varicose veins remained occluded in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Endovenous ablation of truncal varicose veins appears to be safe with a low thrombotic event rate with or without pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis. However, more data are needed before a final recommendation regarding the best thromboprophylaxis treatment option can be given.

Prospective randomized trial of antithrombotic strategies following great saphenous vein ablation using injectable polidocanol endovenous microfoam (Varithena)

OBJECTIVE

Postablation deep vein thrombosis (DVT) represents a potentially serious complication after Varithena polidocanol endovenous microfoam (PEM) ablation. The following primary outcomes were assessed: whether (1) adjunctive apixaban anticoagulation or (2) mechanical deep venous system (DVS) saline flushing could decrease saphenofemoral junction (SFJ) thrombus extension (postablation superficial thrombus extension [PASTE]) and/or DVT compared with compression alone, after great saphenous vein (GSV) PEM ablation.

METHODS

Varithena 1% PEM ablation patients were randomized to (1) SFJ compression, (2) compression and DVS saline flushing, or (3) compression, DVS saline flushing, and 5 days of postprocedural 5 mg oral apixaban anticoagulation twice daily. Duplex imaging was obtained 7 to 10 days after PEM ablation and PASTE/DVT incidence (primary end point) was compared between groups at this time point.

RESULTS

We treated 304 limbs in 257 patients with PEM. Overall, 103 limbs received SFJ compression (group C, 33.8%), 101 received compression and deep venous flushing (group D, 32.9%), and 100 received compression, deep flush, and anticoagulation (group A, 33.2%). Mean ultrasound follow-up time was 9.7 days (all patients) with a primary GSV closure rate of 92.4%. SFJ PASTE (II-IV) occurred in 0.9%, 1.0%, and 0% (groups C, D, and A, respectively). DVT occurred in 16.7%, 14.7%, and 1.98% (groups C, D, and A; χ², P = .002). Patients in group A receiving apixaban anticoagulation had a significant reduction in DVT compared with patients in group C (1.98% vs 16.7%, χ²; P < .001); likewise, patients in group A had a significantly decreased DVT occurrence compared with group D (14.7% vs 1.98%; χ², P = .00162), whereas patients in groups C and D were not statistically different (16.7% vs 14.7%; χ², P = .60).

CONCLUSIONS

(1) Neither adjunctive DVS flushing nor anticoagulation decreased clinically relevant SFJ PASTE (II-IV) incidence, which remained similarly low across all groups and ranged between 0% and 1%, regardless of adjunctive DVS flushing or anticoagulation. This rate was significantly lower than prior reports (2.3%-4.1%). (2) DVS flushing had no influence on the rate of DVT. Observed PEM-induced DVT incidence using SFJ compression alone or compression with DVS flushing (16.7% and 14.7%, respectively) was significantly higher than prior reports (2.5%-9.6%). This finding may relate to the greater extent of AK/BK GSV territory treated in the present study. (3) Five days of postprocedural oral apixaban anticoagulation, 5 mg given twice daily, significantly decreased DVT occurrence to 1.98%, compared with nonanticoagulated patients (16.7%). This finding is comparable with the DVT rates reported after endovenous thermal ablation (0.7-1.7%). (4) Postprocedural apixaban anticoagulation may have a significant preventive role in decreasing DVT occurrence after PEM ablation.

Current state of the problem of risk assessment and prevention of venous thromboembolic complications after thermal obliteration of superficial veins

Venous thromboembolic complications (VTEO) after modern minimally invasive superficial vein interventions are an infrequent but very dramatic event. This article presents a review of the literature, covering the issues of prevalence, prognosis and pharmacological prevention of VTEO. The performed studies demonstrate that the incidence of symptomatic thrombotic complications after endovenous thermal obliteration does not exceed 0,5%, but taking into account asymptomatic thermally induced thromboses and subclinical occlusions of the muscular veins of the lower leg, this figure can exceed 10%. There is a high heterogeneity of the data, possibly due to differences in the individual risk of VTEO. The most validated tool for assessing the latter is the Caprini Scale, which has not been sufficiently studied in the surgical treatment of varicose veins. The administration of prophylactic doses of anticoagulants after thermal obliteration of saphenous veins is widely used in routine clinical practice, despite the lack of convincing evidence for the appropriateness of this approach. In recent years, the use of direct oral anticoagulants against the official instruction (off-label) has gained great popularity as an alternative to heparin. The largest evidence base has accumulated for the use of rivaroxaban 10 mg, which is associated with high efficacy and safety. Based on completed clinical trials, it is not possible to formulate unequivocal recommendations for prophylactic anticoagulant doses after thermal obliteration of superficial veins at this time. Additional studies are required to identify patients with an individually increased risk of thrombosis in whom prophylactic doses of anticoagulants may be of maximum benefit.

Thromboprophylaxis in lower limb varicose vein surgery in Brazil

Background

Despite all the investment in primary venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis for surgical patients in recent years, there are still no specific guidelines for those who undergo procedures to treat lower limb varicose veins.

Objectives

To evaluate the profile of VTE prophylaxis practices among Brazilian vascular surgeons conducting lower limb varicose vein procedures.

Methods

Survey design, sending an electronic questionnaire to Brazilian vascular surgeons. Respondents were divided between those who perform saphenous vein treatment with conventional surgery and those who perform thermoablation for the purpose of comparison between groups.

Results

Of 765 respondents, 405 (53%) treat saphenous veins with conventional surgery for, 44 (6%) with foam, and 199 (26%) with thermoablation (endolaser or radiofrequency). Surgeons who perform thermoablation prescribed more pharmacoprophylaxis after varicose vein surgery than those who perform conventional surgery (67/199, 34% vs. 112/405, 28%; p = 0.002). The thermoablation group stratifies patients for thromboembolism risk more frequently than the conventional surgery group (102/199, 51% vs. 179/405, 44%; p = 0.004). Both groups use enoxaparin as the most frequent drug for prophylaxis, but the thermoablation group uses proportionally more direct oral anticoagulants than the conventional surgery group (26% vs. 10%, p<0.001).

Conclusions

Brazilian vascular surgeons who perform saphenous vein treatment by thermoablation prescribe pharmacoprophylaxis more frequently and for a longer period than those who use conventional surgery.

Thromboprophylaxis in lower limb varicose vein surgery in Brazil

Abstract Background Despite all the investment in primary venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis for surgical patients in recent years, there are still no specific guidelines for those who undergo procedures to treat lower limb varicose veins. Objectives To evaluate the profile of VTE prophylaxis practices among Brazilian vascular surgeons conducting lower limb varicose vein procedures. Methods Survey design, sending an electronic questionnaire to Brazilian vascular surgeons. Respondents were divided between those who perform saphenous vein treatment with conventional surgery and those who perform thermoablation for the purpose of comparison between groups. Results Of 765 respondents, 405 (53%) treat saphenous veins with conventional surgery for, 44 (6%) with foam, and 199 (26%) with thermoablation (endolaser or radiofrequency). Surgeons who perform thermoablation prescribed more pharmacoprophylaxis after varicose vein surgery than those who perform conventional surgery (67/199, 34% vs. 112/405, 28%; p = 0.002). The thermoablation group stratifies patients for thromboembolism risk more frequently than the conventional surgery group (102/199, 51% vs. 179/405, 44%; p = 0.004). Both groups use enoxaparin as the most frequent drug for prophylaxis, but the thermoablation group uses proportionally more direct oral anticoagulants than the conventional surgery group (26% vs. 10%, p<0.001). Conclusions Brazilian vascular surgeons who perform saphenous vein treatment by thermoablation prescribe pharmacoprophylaxis more frequently and for a longer period than those who use conventional surgery.