Portions of these data were presented in a poster at the XVII World Meeting of the International Union of Phlebology, 8–13 September 2013, Boston, MA, USA.
We assessed the incidence of venous thromboembolism following treatment of great saphenous insufficiency by endovenous thermal ablation or foam sclerotherapy using meta-analysis of published randomized controlled trials and case series.
Methods
Medline, Embase, Cochrane, and Clinical Trials Registry databases were searched from January 2000 through January 2013 for randomized controlled trials and large case series employing endovenous thermal ablation or foam sclerotherapy as a single modality for the treatment of great saphenous insufficiency, with concomitant postoperative duplex scanning. Pooled (stratified) incidence of venous thromboembolism with 95% confidence intervals was estimated using the DerSimonian–Laird procedure for random effects meta-analysis. A bootstrap analysis was performed to examine between-modality differences.
Results
Twelve randomized controlled trials and 19 case series investigating endovenous thermal ablation (radiofrequency ablation with VNUS/Covidien ClosureFAST™ catheter only, endovenous laser ablation, or both) were included. Data from 12 randomized controlled trials and 6 case series investigating nonproprietary foam preparations were analyzed. Estimated incidence of venous thromboembolism was low (mostly <1%) and similar across treatment modalities and study types.
Conclusions
Treatment of great saphenous insufficiency by endovenous thermal ablation or foam sclerotherapy is a common vascular intervention. The stratified incidence of venous thromboembolism appears to be low as reported in both randomized controlled trials and case series investigating these modalities. Although duplex scans were obtained postoperatively, a minority of studies specified protocols for venous thromboembolism detection.
GloviczkiPComerotaAJDalsingMC. 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 Surg2011; 53: 2S–48S.
2.
Kabnick L, Ombrellino M, Agis H, et al. Endovenous heat induced thrombosis (EHIT) at the superficial deep venous junction: a new post-treatment clinical entity, classification and potential treatment strategies. In: Proceedngs of the 18th annual meeting of the American Venous Forum, Miami, FL, 2006.
3.
RasmussenLHLawaetzMBjoernL. Randomized clinical trial comparing endovenous laser ablation, radiofrequency ablation, foam sclerotherapy and surgical stripping for great saphenous varicose veins. Br J Surg2011; 98: 1079–1087.
4.
DermodyMO’DonnellTFBalkEM. Complication of endovenous ablation in randomized controlled trials. J Vasc Surg: Venous Lym Dis2013; 1: 427–436.
5.
Benarroch-GampelJSheffieldKMBoydCA. Analysis of venous thromboembolic events after saphenous ablation. J Vasc Surg: Venous Lym Dis2013; 1: 26–32.
6.
RathbunSNorrisAStonerJ. Efficacy and safety of endovenous foam sclerotherapy: meta-analysis for treatment of venous disorders. Phlebology2012; 27: 105–117.
7.
LoscalzoJ. Pilot trials in clinical research: of what value are they?Circulation2009; 119: 1694–1696.
8.
DexterDKabnickLBerlandT. Complications of endovenous lasers. Phlebology2012; 27: 40–45.
9.
LipseyMWWilsonDB. The way in which intervention studies have “personality” and why it is important to meta-analysis. Eval Health Prof2001; 24: 236–254.
10.
NormandSL. Meta-analysis: formulating, evaluating, combining, and reporting. Stat Med1999; 18: 321–359.
11.
DerSimonianRLairdN. Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials1986; 7: 177–188.
12.
EfronBTibshiraniRJ. An introduction to the bootstrap, New York: NY: Chapman & Hall, 1993.
13.
CarradiceDMekakoAIMazariFA. Clinical and technical outcomes from a randomized clinical trial of endovenous laser ablation compared with conventional surgery for great saphenous varicose veins. Br J Surg2011; 98: 1117–1123.
14.
ChristensonJTGueddiSGemayelG. Prospective randomized trial comparing endovenous laser ablation and surgery for treatment of primary great saphenous varicose veins with a 2-year follow-up. J Vasc Surg2010; 52: 1234–1241.
15.
DarwoodRJTheivacumarNDellagrammaticasD. Randomized clinical trial comparing endovenous laser ablation with surgery for the treatment of primary great saphenous varicose veins. Br J Surg2008; 95: 294–301.
16.
DisselhoffBCder KinderenDJKelderJC. Randomized clinical trial comparing endovenous laser with cryostripping for great saphenous varicose veins. Br J Surg2008; 95: 1232–1238.
17.
RasmussenLHBjoernLLawaetzM. Randomized trial comparing endovenous laser ablation of the great saphenous vein with high ligation and stripping in patients with varicose veins: short-term results. J Vasc Surg2007; 46: 308–315.
18.
RassKFringsNGlowackiP. Comparable effectiveness of endovenous laser ablation and high ligation with stripping of the great saphenous vein: two-year results of a randomized clinical trial (RELACS study). Arch Dermatol2012; 148: 49–58.
19.
PronkPGauwSAMooijMC. Randomised controlled trial comparing sapheno-femoral ligation and stripping of the great saphenous vein with endovenous laser ablation (980 nm) using local tumescent anaesthesia: one year results. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg2010; 40: 649–656.
20.
AlmeidaJIKaufmanJGockeritzO. Radiofrequency endovenous ClosureFAST versus laser ablation for the treatment of great saphenous reflux: a multicenter, single-blinded, randomized study (RECOVERY study). J Vasc Interv Radiol2009; 20: 752–759.
21.
GaleSSLeeJNWalshME. A randomized, controlled trial of endovenous thermal ablation using the 810-nm wavelength laser and the ClosurePLUS radiofrequency ablation methods for superficial venous insufficiency of the great saphenous vein. J Vasc Surg2010; 52: 645–650.
22.
NordonIMHinchliffeRJBrarR. A prospective double-blind randomized controlled trial of radiofrequency versus laser treatment of the great saphenous vein in patients with varicose veins. Ann Surg2011; 254: 876–881.
23.
ShepherdACGohelMSBrownLC. Randomized clinical trial of VNUS ClosureFAST radiofrequency ablation versus laser for varicose veins. Br J Surg2010; 97: 810–818.
24.
ProebstleTMVagoBAlmJ. Treatment of the incompetent great saphenous vein by endovenous radiofrequency powered segmental thermal ablation: first clinical experience. J Vasc Surg2008; 47: 151–156.
25.
ZunigaJMHingoraniAAscherE. Short-term outcome analysis of radiofrequency ablation using ClosurePlus vs ClosureFast catheters in the treatment of incompetent great saphenous vein. J Vasc Surg2012; 55: 1048–1051.
26.
CarradiceDMazariFAKMekakoA. Energy delivery during 810 nm endovenous laser ablation of varicose veins and post-procedural morbidity. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg2010; 40: 393–398.
27.
DesmyttereJGrardCWassmerB. Endovenous 980-nm laser treatment of saphenous veins in a series of 500 patients. J Vasc Surg2007; 46: 1242–1247.
28.
FernandezCFRoizentalMCarvalloJ. Combined endovenous laser therapy and microphlebectomy in the treatment of varicose veins: efficacy and complications of a large single-center experience. J Vasc Surg2008; 48: 947–952.
29.
Hamel-DesnosCGerardJLDesnosP. Endovenous laser procedure in a clinic room: feasibility and side effects study of 1,700 cases. Phlebology2009; 24: 125–130.
30.
KnippBSBlackburnSABloomJR. Endovenous laser ablation: venous outcomes and thrombotic complications are independent of the presence of deep venous insufficiency. J Vasc Surg2008; 48: 1538–1545.
31.
LinJCPetersonELRiveraML. Vein mapping prior to endovenous catheter ablation of the great saphenous vein predicts risk of endovenous heat-induced thrombosis. Vasc Endovascular Surg2012; 46: 378–383.
32.
MackenzieRKCassarKBrittendenJ. Introducing endovenous laser therapy ablation to a national health service vascular surgical unit—the Aberdeen experience. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg2009; 38: 208–212.
33.
MarshPPriceBAHoldstockJ. Deep vein thrombosis (DVT) after venous thermoablation techniques: rates of endovenous heat-induced thrombosis (EHIT) and classical DVT after radiofrequency and endovenous laser ablation in a single centre. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg2010; 40: 521–527.
34.
RaviRTraylerEABarrettDA. Endovenous thermal ablation of superficial venous insufficiency of the lower extremity: single-center experience with 3000 limbs treated in a 7-year period. J Endovasc Ther2009; 16: 500–505.
35.
SchwarzTvon HodenbergEFurtwanglerC. Endovenous laser ablation of varicose veins with the 1470-nm diode laser. J Vasc Surg2010; 51: 1474–1478.
36.
SpreaficoGKabnickLBerlandTL. Laser saphenous ablations in more than 1,000 limbs with long-term duplex examination follow-up. Ann Vasc Surg2011; 25: 71–78.
37.
van den BremerJJoostenPPHammingJF. Implementation of endovenous laser ablation for varicose veins in a large community hospital: the first 400 procedures. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg2009; 37: 486–491.
38.
TheivacumarNSDellagrammaticasDBealeRJ. Factors influencing the effectiveness of endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) in the treatment of great saphenous vein reflux. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg2008; 35: 119–123.
39.
CretonDPichotOSessaC. Radiofrequency-powered segmental thermal obliteration carried out with the ClosureFast procedure: results at 1 year. Ann Vasc Surg2010; 24: 360–366.
40.
KingTCoulombGGoldmanA. Experience with concomitant ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy and endovenous laser treatment in chronic venous disorder and its influence on Health Related Quality of Life: interim analysis of more than 1000 consecutive procedures. Int Angiol2009; 28: 289–297.
41.
FigueiredoMAraujoSBarrosNJr. Results of surgical treatment compared with ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy in patients with varicose veins: a prospective randomised study. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg2009; 38: 758–763.
42.
LattimerCRAzzamMKalodikiE. Cost and effectiveness of laser with phlebectomies compared with foam sclerotherapy in superficial venous insufficiency. Early results of a randomised controlled trial. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg2012; 43: 594–600.
43.
OuvryPAllaertFADesnosP. Efficacy of polidocanol foam versus liquid in sclerotherapy of the great saphenous vein: a multicentre randomised controlled trial with a 2-year follow-up. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg2008; 36: 366–370.
44.
ShadidNCeulenRNelemansP. Randomized clinical trial of ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy versus surgery for the incompetent great saphenous vein. Br J Surg2012; 99: 1062–1070.
45.
BradburyAWBateGPangK. Ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy is a safe and clinically effective treatment for superficial venous reflux. J Vasc Surg2010; 52: 939–945.
46.
ChenCHChiuCSYangCH. Ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy for treating incompetent great saphenous veins—results of 5 years of analysis and morphologic evolvement study. Dermatol Surg2012; 38: 851–857.
47.
DarvallKABateGRAdamDJ. Duplex ultrasound outcomes following ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy of symptomatic primary great saphenous varicose veins. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg2010; 40: 534–539.
48.
GilletJLGuedesJMGuexJJ. Side-effects and complications of foam sclerotherapy of the great and small saphenous veins: a controlled multicentre prospective study including 1,025 patients. Phlebology2009; 24: 131–138.
49.
Gonzalez-ZehRArmisenRBarahonaS. Endovenous laser and echo-guided foam ablation in great saphenous vein reflux: one-year follow-up results. J Vasc Surg2008; 48: 940–946.
50.
KolbelTHinchliffeRJLindbladB. Catheter-directed foam sclerotherapy of axial saphenous reflux: early results. Phlebology2007; 22: 219–222.
51.
BlaiseSBossonJLDiamandJM. Ultrasound-guided sclerotherapy of the great saphenous vein with 1% vs. 3% polidocanol foam: a multicentre double-blind randomised trial with 3-year follow-up. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg2010; 39: 779–786.
52.
CeulenRPMBullens-GoessensYIJMPi-Van de VenneSJA. Outcomes and side effects of duplex-guided sclerotherapy in the treatment of great saphenous veins with 1% versus 3% polidocanol foam: results of a randomized controlled trial with 1-year follow-up. Dermatol Surg2007; 33: 276–281.
53.
Hamel-DesnosCDesnosPWollmannJC. Evaluation of the efficacy of polidocanol in the form of foam compared with liquid form in sclerotherapy of the greater saphenous vein: initial results. Dermatol Surg2003; 29: 1170–1175; discussion 5.
54.
Hamel-DesnosCOuvryPBenigniJP. Comparison of 1% and 3% polidocanol foam in ultrasound guided sclerotherapy of the great saphenous vein: a randomised, double-blind trial with 2 year-follow-up. “The 3/1 Study.”. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg2007; 34: 723–729. discussion 30.
55.
O'HareJLStephensJParkinD. Randomized clinical trial of different bandage regimens after foam sclerotherapy for varicose veins. Br J Surg2010; 97: 650–656.
56.
YamakiTNozakiMSakuraiH. Multiple small-dose injections can reduce the passage of sclerosant foam into deep veins during foam sclerotherapy for varicose veins. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg2009; 37: 343–348.
57.
YamakiTHamahataASoejimaK. Prospective randomised comparative study of visual foam sclerotherapy alone or in combination with ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy for treatment of superficial venous insufficiency: preliminary report. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg2012; 43: 343–347.
58.
SuttonPAEl-DhuwaibYDyerJ. The incidence of post operative venous thromboembolism in patients undergoing varicose vein surgery recorded in Hospital Episode Statistics. Ann R Coll Surg Engl2012; 94: 481–483.
59.
KulkarniSRMessengerDESlimFJA. The incidence and characterization of deep vein thrombosis following ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy in 1000 legs with superficial venous reflux. J Vasc Surg: Venous Lym Dis2013; 1: 231–238.
