Display options
Cite
Perrins S, Cha A, Qaqish R, et al. Clinical and anatomic outcomes of endovenous radiofrequency ablation performed on symptomatic small-diameter great saphenous veins. J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord. 2013;1(3):245-9doi: 10.1016/j.jvsv.2012.10.064.
Perrins, S., Cha, A., Qaqish, R., Plummer, D., Hsu, R., & Dietzek, A. M. (2013). Clinical and anatomic outcomes of endovenous radiofrequency ablation performed on symptomatic small-diameter great saphenous veins. Journal of vascular surgery. Venous and lymphatic disorders, 1(3), 245-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvsv.2012.10.064
Perrins, Steven, et al. "Clinical and anatomic outcomes of endovenous radiofrequency ablation performed on symptomatic small-diameter great saphenous veins." Journal of vascular surgery. Venous and lymphatic disorders vol. 1,3 (2013): 245-9. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvsv.2012.10.064
Perrins S, Cha A, Qaqish R, Plummer D, Hsu R, Dietzek AM. Clinical and anatomic outcomes of endovenous radiofrequency ablation performed on symptomatic small-diameter great saphenous veins. J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord. 2013 Jul;1(3):245-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jvsv.2012.10.064. Epub 2013 Mar 07. PMID: 26992582.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord. 2013 Jul;1(3):245-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jvsv.2012.10.064. Epub 2013 Mar 07.

Clinical and anatomic outcomes of endovenous radiofrequency ablation performed on symptomatic small-diameter great saphenous veins.

Journal of vascular surgery. Venous and lymphatic disorders

Steven Perrins, Andrew Cha, Robert Qaqish, Dahlia Plummer, Richard Hsu, Alan M Dietzek

Affiliations

  1. Department of Vascular Surgery, Danbury Hospital, Danbury, Conn.
  2. Department of Vascular Surgery, Danbury Hospital, Danbury, Conn. Electronic address: [email protected].

PMID: 26992582 DOI: 10.1016/j.jvsv.2012.10.064

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The efficacy of radiofrequency ablation (RFA) for symptomatic varicose veins is well established. Alternatively, there is less consensus and little data on outcomes when treating great saphenous veins (GSV) of small diameter (≤5 mm). The purpose of this study is to assess clinical and anatomical outcomes of RFA on symptomatic patients with small GSV.

METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed on our symptomatic patients who received RFA of incompetent GSV without any concomitant adjunctive procedures between January 2008 and December 2011. Limbs with GSV thigh diameter ≤5 mm and >5 mm on duplex while standing were subject to review. Clinical success was defined as an improvement in Venous Clinical Severity Score (VCSS) at 3 months. Anatomic success was defined as absence of venous flow ≤3 cm distal to the saphenofemoral junction on duplex ultrasound examination. Changes in CEAP class were noted.

RESULTS: In 307 patients, 55 limbs in 44 patients met inclusion criteria. Baseline median VCSS was 4 (interquartile range [IQR], 4, 5) for those patients with diameter ≤5 mm. Clinical success was seen in 83% of limbs at 3 months with a median VCSS change of -2 (IQR, -3, -1). None of the treated limbs had phlebectomy for symptomatic refluxing GSV varicosities prior to 3-month follow up. One phlebectomy was performed for cosmesis at 78 days postprocedure. Anatomic success was achieved in 96% of limbs at 3 months. Baseline median CEAP was 2 (IQR, 2, 2). The median CEAP change at 3 months was 0 (IQR, -1, 0). One patient experienced thrombus extension into the saphenofemoral junction at 4 days.

CONCLUSIONS: In our experience, RFA of symptomatic small-diameter GSV provides comparable clinical and anatomic outcomes to that of current published data. Our findings suggest that these patients benefit clinically from RFA.

Copyright © 2013 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Publication Types