Duplex ultrasound outcomes following ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy of symptomatic recurrent great saphenous varicose veins

Darvall KAL, Batev GR, Adam DJ, Silverman SH, Bradbury AW. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2011;42:107-114.

by Michel Perrin, Lyon, France

To view PubMed abstract, please click here

Review
Recurrent varicose veins after operative treatment are a common, complex, and costly problem for both patients and physicians. To deal with this problem an international consensus meeting was held in Paris in 1998, which resulted in guidelines for the definition and description of REcurrent Varices After Surgery (REVAS).1 These guidelines were very cautious, given the absence of conclusive studies.
Thirteen years later data on outcome after repeated operative treatment are available, but despite new procedures a strong recommendation regarding REVAS management is still not possible. 2-10 Four studies deal with ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy (USGFS), but none is a randomized controlled trial comparing the outcomes of available operative treatments. This could explain why in the AVF-SVS clinical practice guidelines document all redo procedures are listed including ligation of the saphenous stump, ambulatory phlebectomy, sclerotherapy, and endovenous thermal ablation, and are given a weak recommendation, ie, 2C. 11
Consequently this well documented study presenting 1-year outcome after redo treatment by USGFS has to be reviewed in depth.
First, the term recurrence is used as defined in the Vein-Term consensus document. Knowing that it is frequently difficult to distinguish between true recurrence, residual vein, and disease progression, they must all be considered and the term recurrent varicose veins used, or better still the acronym PREVAIT (PREsence of Varices After – any kind of – operatIve Treatment).12
Second, the outcome of treatment by USFGS presented in this article is in accordance with published reports (Table I), but is better documented, particularly reflux extension and location as well as repeated USFGS sessions. As the pattern of recurrence was clearly identified (see Table 1 of the article), it is a pity there is no separate evaluation of outcome in patients presenting either incompetent saphenofemoral junction in the great saphenous vein or neovascularization in the proximal thigh great saphenous vein or isolated great saphenous vein remnant reflux.
Also missing are clinical improvement (signs and symptoms) data as well as patient satisfaction, but perhaps the Birmingham group intend to report them in a forthcoming paper.

Table 1 – Click to enlarge

As stated by the authors, the present paper adds further evidence that USFGS is a safe and clinically effective treatment for REVAS in the great saphenous vein system. This statement may be extrapolated to other operative treatments: thermal ablation and other open surgery procedures including those preserving the great saphenous vein. Knowing that randomized controlled trials would be very difficult to undertake in PREVAIT patients, we should consider that USFGS has become the first-line treatment of varicose vein recurrence after operative treatment.

References:
1. Perrin M, Guex JJ, Ruckley CV, et al: REVAS group. Recurrent varices after surgery (REVAS), a consensus document. Cardiovascular Surgery. 2000;8:233-245.
2. Fassiadis N, Kianifard B, Holdstock JM, Whiteley MS. A novel approach to the treatment of recurrent varicose veins. Int Angiology. 2002;21:275-276.
3. McDonagh B, Sorenson S, Gray C, et al. Clinical spectrum of recurrent postoperative varicose veins and efficacy of sclerotherapy management using the compass technique. Phlebology. 2003;18:173-185.
4. Ferrara F, Bernbach HR. La sclérothérapie des varices récidivées. Phlébologie. 2005;58:147-150.
5. Hinchcliffe RJ, Ubhi J, Beech A, Ellison J, Braithwaite BD. A prospective randomized controlled trial of VNUS Closure versus surgery for the treatment of recurrent long saphenous varicose veins. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2006;31:212-218.
6. Darke SG, Baker SJA. Ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy for the treatment of varicose veins. Br J Surg. 2006;93:969-974.
7. Coleridge Smith P. Chronic venous disease treated by ultrasound guided foam sclerotherapy. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2006;32:577-583.
8. Kakkos SK, Bountouroglou DG, Azzam M, Kalodiki E, Daskalopoulos M, Geroulakos G. Effectiveness and safety of ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy for recurrent varicose
veins: immediate results. J Endovasc Ther. 2006;13:357-364.
9. O’Hare JL, Parkin D, Vandenbroeck CP, Earnshaw JJ. Mid term results of ultrasound guided foam sclerotherapy for complicated and uncomplicated varicose veins. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2008;36:109-13.
10. van Groenendael L, van der Vliet JA, Flinkenflogel L, Roovers EA, van Sterkenburg SMM, Reijnen MMPJ. Treatment of recurrent varicose veins of the great saphenous vein by conventional Surgery and endovenous laser ablation. J Vasc Surg. 2009;50:1106-1113.
11. Gloviczki P, Comerota AJ, Dalsing MC, et al. The care of patients with varicose veins and associated chronic venous diseases: Clinical practice guidelines of the Society for Vascular Surgery and the American Venous Forum. J Vasc Surg. 2011;53:2S-48S.
12. Eklöf B, Perrin M, Delis KT, Rutherford RB, Gloviczki P. Updated terminology of chronic venous disorders: The VEIN-TERM transatlantic interdisciplinary consensus document. J Vasc Surg. 2009:49:498-501.