Selective crossectomy combined with mechanochemical ablation in the treatment of great saphenous vein insufficiency: Early results of a single center experience

Abstract

Background

Selective crossectomy and mechanochemical ablation (MOCA) of great saphenous vein (GSV) have been used, for years, individually in the treatment of chronic venous insufficiency. In this paper, we focus on the advantages of a combination of the two techniques, in order to prevent complications and recurrence.

Methods

A preoperative clinical and instrumental screening phase was conducted for the purpose of dividing patients into three groups: “Saph+Cross” group (51/139 patients) underwent saphenectomy and crossectomy; “MOCA” group (44/139 patients) underwent MOCA of GSV with Flebogrif® device; “MOCA + Cross” group (44/139 patients) subjected to both MOCA and crossectomy procedures.

Recurrence rate, defined as total recanalization of GSV and/or onset of neosaphena and/or new varicose veins, was used as a primary outcome. Secondary outcomes were procedural time and intra- and post-procedural complications.

Results

We conducted a 1-, 6-, and 12-month follow-up with Duplex scan. The recurrence rates were 3.9%, 21.8%, and 4.5% for “Saph+Cross,” “MOCA,” and “MOCA+Cross,” respectively, with a significant difference for the comparison between “MOCA” and “Saph+Cross” (MOCA vs Saph+Cross: OR 5.35, CI95% [0.98; 54.6], p-value .040).

The sub-analysis of primary outcome highlighted a lower recanalization rate of GSV when combining the crossectomy with MOCA procedure (2.2% MOCA+Cross vs 15.9% MOCA; 0.12 OR, [0.002; 1.02] CI95%, p-value .029).

Among the secondary outcomes, “MOCA” showed a shorter procedural time than the other groups (Saph+Cross: 51.3 ± 11.4; MOCA: 45.1 ± 7.5; MOCA+Cross: 50.4 ± 10; p-value .027). No significant differences were noted in terms of intra- and post-procedural complications.

Conclusions

The results showed that patients treated with saphenectomy and crossectomy have a lower recurrence rate compared to MOCA alone and MOCA + crossectomy procedures.

The association of crossectomy with MOCA significantly reduces the recanalization rate of GSV, and it is also characterized by a higher free survival from recurrence (SSF) than with MOCA alone.

Keywords

chronic venous disease great saphenous vein surgery endovenous ablation

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Lurie

Passman

Meisner

, et al. The 2020 update of the CEAP classification system and reporting standards. J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphatic Disord 2020; 8(3): 342–352. DOI: 10.1016/j.jvsv.2019.12.075.

Mansilha

Sousa

. Pathophysiological mechanisms of chronic venous disease and implications for venoactive drug therapy. Int J Mol Sci 2018; 19(6): 1669. DOI: 10.3390/ijms19061669.

Serra

Grande

Butrico

, et al. Epidemiology, diagnosis and treatment of chronic venous disease: a systematic review. Chirurgia 2016; 29(2): 34–45.

Davies

. The seriousness of chronic venous disease: a review of real-world evidence. Adv Ther 2019; 36(Suppl 1): 5–12. DOI: 10.1007/s12325-019-0881-7.

Youn

Lee

. Chronic venous insufficiency and varicose veins of the lower extremities. Korean J Intern Med 2019; 34(2): 269–283. DOI: 10.3904/kjim.2018.230.

Ortega

Fraile-Martínez

García-Montero

, et al. Understanding chronic venous disease: a critical overview of its pathophysiology and medical management. J Clin Med 2021; 10(15): 3239.

Whiteley

Dos Santos

Lee

, et al. Mechanochemical ablation causes endothelial and medial damage to the vein wall resulting in deeper penetration of sclerosant compared with sclerotherapy alone in extrafascial great saphenous vein using an ex vivo model. J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord 2017; 5(3): 370–377. DOI: 10.1016/j.jvsv.2016.12.009.

Ammollo

Petrone

Giribono

, et al.

Early results of mechanochemical ablation with Flebogrif® in great saphenous vein insufficiency: does polidocanol concentration affect outcome?

Transl Med Unisa 2020; 21: 47–51.

Bush

Flanagan

, et al. Factors associated with recurrence of varicose veins after thermal ablation: results of the recurrent veins after thermal ablation study. ScientificWorldJournal 2014; 2014: 505843. DOI: 10.1155/2014/505843.

10.

Recek

. Significance of reflux abolition at the saphenofemoral junction in connection with stripping and ablative methods. Int J Angiol 2015; 24(4): 249–261. DOI: 10.1055/s-0035-1546439.

11.

Wittens

Davies

Bækgaard

, et al. Editor’s choice - management of chronic venous disease: clinical practice guidelines of the European society for vascular surgery (ESVS). Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 2015; 49(6): 678–737. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejvs.2015.02.007.

12.

Gloviczki

Comerota

Dalsing

, 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(5 Suppl): 2S–48S. DOI: 10.1016/j.jvs.2011.01.079.

13.

Ontario Health (Quality) . Nonthermal endovenous procedures for varicose veins: a health technology assessment. Ont Health Technol Assess Ser 2021; 21(8): 1–188.

14.

Whing

Nandhra

Nesbitt

, et al. Interventions for great saphenous vein incompetence. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2021; 8(8): CD005624.

15.

Siribumrungwong

Wilasrusmee

Orrapin

, et al. Interventions for great saphenous vein reflux: network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. Br J Surg 2021; 108(3): 244–255.

16.

Gasior

O’Donnell

JPM

Aherne

, et al. Outcomes of saphenous vein intervention in the management of superficial venous incompetence. Ann Surg 2021; 275: e324–e333. DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000004914.

17.

Geier

Mumme

Hummel

, et al. Validity of duplex-ultrasound in identifying the cause of groin recurrence after varicose vein surgery. J Vasc Surg 2009; 49(4): 968–972.

18.

Stücker

Netz

Breuckmann

, et al. Histomorphologic classification of recurrent saphenofemoral reflux. J Vasc Surg 2004; 39(4): 816–821.

19.

Pittaluga

Chastanet

Guex

. Great saphenous vein stripping with preservation of sapheno-femoral confluence: hemodynamic and clinical results. J Vasc Surg 2008; 47(6): 1300–1304.

20.

Hartmann

. Endovenöse (minimalinvasive) Verfahren zur Therapie der Varikose. Der Hautarzt 2020; 71: 12–19.

21.

Genovese

Furino

Quarto

. Superficial epigastric vein sparing in the saphenous-femoral crossectomy or in the closures of the saphena magna. Ann Ital Chir 2015; 86: 383–385.

22.

Ahn

Jung

Chung

, et al. Changes in saphenous vein stump and low incidence of endovenous heat-induced thrombosis after radiofrequency ablation of great saphenous vein incompetence. Dermatol Surg 2016; 42(4): 515–520.

23.

Zubilewicz

Terlecki

, et al. Application of endovenous mechanochemical ablation (MOCA) with FlebogrifTM to treat varicose veins of the lower extremities: a single center experience over 3 months of observation. Acta Angiol 2017; 22(4): 137–142.

24.

Alozai

Huizing

Schreve

, et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis of mechanochemical endovenous ablation using Flebogrif for varicose veins: a summary of evidence. J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord 2021; 10(1): 248–257.e2. DOI: 10.1016/j.jvsv.2021.05.010.

25.

Tawfik

Sorour

El-Laboudy

. Laser ablation versus mechanochemical ablation in the treatment of primary varicose veins: a randomized clinical trial. J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord 2020; 8(2): 211–215. DOI: 10.1016/j.jvsv.2019.10.025.

26.

Baccellieri

Apruzzi

Ardita

, et al. Early results of mechanochemical ablation for small saphenous vein incompetency using 2% polidocanol. J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord 2021; 9(3): 683–690. DOI: 10.1016/j.jvsv.2020.09.001.

27.

Harlander-Locke

Jimenez

Lawrence

, et al. Endovenous ablation with concomitant phlebectomy is a safe and effective method of treatment for symptomatic patients with axial reflux and large incompetent tributaries. J Vasc Surg 2013; 58(1): 166–172. DOI: 10.1016/j.jvs.2012.12.054.