Risk factors for short and long-term great saphenous vein recanalization in patients treated with endovenous radiofrequency ablation

Safety and efficacy of endovenous ablation in patients with a history of deep vein thrombosis

OBJECTIVE

Endovenous ablation is the standard of care for patients with symptomatic superficial venous insufficiency. For patients with a history of deep vein thrombosis (DVT), concern exists for an increased risk of postprocedural complications, particularly venous thromboembolism. The objective of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of endovenous thermal ablation in patients with a history of DVT.

METHODS

The national Vascular Quality Initiative Varicose Vein Registry was queried for superficial venous procedures performed from January 2014 to July 2021. Limbs treated with radiofrequency or laser ablation were compared between patients with and without a DVT history. The primary safety end point was incident DVT or endothermal heat-induced thrombosis (EHIT) II-IV in the treated limb at <3 months of follow-up. The secondary safety end points included any proximal thrombus extension (ie, EHIT I-IV), major bleeding, hematoma, pulmonary embolism, and death due to the procedure. The primary efficacy end point was technical failure (ie, recanalization at <1 week of follow-up). Secondary efficacy end points included the risk of recanalization over time and the postprocedural change in quality-of-life measures. Outcomes stratified by preoperative use of anticoagulation (AC) were also compared among those with prior DVT.

RESULTS

Among 33,892 endovenous thermal ablations performed on 23,572 individual patients aged 13 to 90 years, 1698 patients (7.2%) had a history of DVT. Patients with prior DVT were older (P < .001), had a higher body mass index (P < .001), were more likely to be male at birth (P < .001) and Black/African American (P < .001), and had greater CEAP classifications (P < .001). A history of DVT conferred a higher risk of new DVT (1.4% vs 0.8%; P = .03), proximal thrombus extension (2.3% vs 1.6%; P = .045), and bleeding (0.2% vs 0.04%; P = .03). EHIT II-IV, pulmonary embolism, and hematoma risk did not differ by DVT history (P = NS). No deaths from treatment occurred in either group. Continuing preoperative AC in patients with prior DVT did not change the risk of any complications after endovenous ablation (P = NS) but did confer an increased hematoma risk among all endovenous thermal ablations and surgeries (P = .001). Technical failure was similar between groups (2.0% vs 1.2%; P = .07), although a history of DVT conferred an increased recanalization risk over time (hazard ratio, 1.90; 95% confidence interval, 1.46, 2.46; P < .001). The groups had comparable improvements in postprocedural venous clinical severity scores and Heaviness, Aching, Swelling, Throbbing, and Itching scores (P = NS).

CONCLUSIONS

Endovenous thermal ablation for patients with a history of DVT was effective. However, appropriate patient counseling regarding a heightened DVT risk, albeit still low, is critical. The decision to continue or withhold AC preoperatively should be tailored on a case-by-case basis.

Factors influencing recurrent varicose vein formation after radiofrequency thermal ablation for truncal reflux performed in two high-volume venous centers

OBJECTIVE

Recanalization of the saphenous vein trunk after endovenous radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is often associated with recurrent varicose veins (RVVs) or recanalization. This study aimed to assess the long-term results of RFA of the great saphenous vein (GSV) and identify the risk factors for GSV recanalization and RVVs during follow-up for patients presenting to dedicated outpatient vein centers.

METHODS

All consecutive patients with incompetent GSVs who underwent RFA between 2009 and 2019 were retrospectively analyzed. The primary study end points were freedom from GSV recanalization and the RVV rate during follow-up. The secondary study end points were the postoperative complication rate and the risk factors for GSV recanalization and RVVs. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify the potential risk factors for GSV recanalization and RVVs.

RESULTS

During the study period, 1568 limbs were treated in 1300 consecutive patients (mean age, 53.5 ± 12.9 years; 71.9% women; CEAP [clinical, etiology, anatomy, pathophysiology] C2-C6; venous clinical severity score >5). Technical success was achieved in 99.7% of cases. At a mean follow-up of 57.2 ± 25.4 months, the GSV occlusion and freedom from reintervention rates were 100% and 100% within 1 week, 97% and 95.7% at 1 year, 95.2% and 93.1% at 3 years, and 92.4% and 92.8% at 5 years, respectively. The recurrence rate was 10% (n = 158) during the follow-up period. On multivariate analysis, a direct confluence of the accessory saphenous vein into the saphenofemoral junction (odds ratio [OR], 1.561; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.0-7.04; P = .032), a history of pregnancy >2 (OR, 3.68; 95% CI, 1.19-11.36; P = .023), C4 (OR, 6.41; 95% CI, 1.36-30.28; P = .019), and preoperative GSV diameter >10 mm (OR, 1.82; 95% CI, 1.65-4.03; P = .043) were risk factors for GSV recanalization. Moreover, age >70 years (OR, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.01-1.06; P = .014) and incompetent perforator veins (OR, 1.17; 95% CI, 0.65-2.03; P = .018) were also risk factors for RVVs.

CONCLUSIONS

RFA is a safe technique to ablate the GSV with a low complication rate and durability during 5 years of follow-up. However, patients with a high clinical score and those with direct confluence of the accessory saphenous vein into the saphenofemoral junction experienced higher long-term GSV recanalization and RVV rates.

Endovenous thermal ablation in the treatment of large great saphenous veins of diameters > 12 mm: A systematic review meta-analysis and meta-regression

BACKGROUND

We sought to assess the safety and efficacy of endovenous thermal ablation (EVTA) in treating large great saphenous veins (GSV) > 12 mm in diameter.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 for comparative and noncomparative studies depicting EVTA in the treatment of GSV > 12 mm. Primary endpoints included GSV occlusion, technical success, deep vein thrombosis (DVT), and endovenous heat-induced thrombosis (EHIT). We conducted a comparative analysis between GSV > 12 mm and < 12 mm and a meta-regression analysis for two sets of studies, one including the whole dataset, containing treatment arms of comparative studies with GSV < 12 mm and one exclusively for GSV > 12 mm.

RESULTS

Seven studies, including 2564 GSV, depicting radiofrequency (RFA) and endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) were included. GSV > 12 mm occlusion, technical success, DVT, and EHIT estimates were 95.9% (95% CI: 93.6-97.8), 99.9% (95% CI: 98.9-100.0), 0.04% (95% CI: 0.0-3.4), and 1.6% (95% CI: 0.3-3.5). Meta-regression revealed a negative association between GSV diameter and occlusion for both the whole dataset (p < 0.01) and the > 12 mm groups (p = 0.04), GSV diameter and technical success for both groups (p < 0.01), (p = 0.016), and GSV diameter and EHIT only for the whole dataset (p = 0.02). The comparative analysis between GSV < 12 mm and GSV > 12 mm displayed an occlusion estimate of OR 1.79 (95% CI: 1.25-2.56) favoring small GSV.

CONCLUSION

Whereas we have displayed excellent occlusion and technical success results for the EVTA of GSV > 12 mm, our analysis has illustrated the unfavorable impact of GSV diameter on occlusion, technical success, and EHIT outcomes regardless of the 12 mm threshold. Potential parameter or device adjustments in a diameter-oriented fashion could further enhance outcomes.

Quality-of-life assessment in patients treated with radiofrequency ablation with or without great saphenous vein recanalization

Quality of life (QoL) in patients with chronic venous disorders has a central role to decide the correct treatment approach. In particular, in case of mini-invasive therapy, such as endovenous radiofrequency ablation (RFA), the postoperative QoL improvement remains one of the most important outcome to be reached. Despite this, very few data are published on the long-term QoL modifications after RFA. The aim of this brief report is to describe and analyze the role of QoL scales in a population of patients treated with RFA of the great saphenous vein and phlebectomies, highlighting results in short- and long-term follow-up period, and differences between recanalized and non-recanalized patients.