It is unclear whether reflux time independently correlates with severity of symptoms in patients with great saphenous vein reflux.
Methods
Eighty patients (mean age 64+/−12.7 years, 56% female) undergoing great saphenous vein (GSV) ablation for symptomatic reflux were assessed prospectively. Fifty-seven underwent ablation with radiofrequency, 23 with cyanoacrylate adhesive. Venous clinical severity score (VCSS) was assessed at, or prior to the time of ablation. The highest reflux time in the GSV was selected.
Results
VCSS values ranged from 2 to 20 (median 7). Mean reflux time was 5.3 s (+/−3.3). The Spearman rank correlation yielded a value of rs = −0.123, p (2-tailed) = .279, which was not significant. The patients with concomitant deep vein reflux had higher VCSS (p < .05). Analysis of patients with only superficial vein reflux (n = 45) also demonstrated a poor correlation between VCSS and reflux time (rs = −0.051, p (2-tailed) = .741).
Conclusion
This prospective study did not demonstrate a correlation between reflux time and VCSS.
KaplanRMCriquiMHDenenbergJO, et al.Quality of life in patients with chronic venous disease: San Diego population study. J Vasc Surg2003; 37(5): 1047–1053.
2.
DaviesAH. The seriousness of chronic venous disease: a review of real-world evidence. Adv Ther2019; 36(Suppl 1): 5–12.
3.
CarpentierPHMaricqHRBiroC, et al.Prevalence, risk factors, and clinical patterns of chronic venous disorders of lower limbs: a population-based study in France. J Vasc Surg2004; 40(4): 650–659.
4.
RudofskyG. Epidemiology and pathophysiology of primary varicose veins. Langenbecks Arch Chir1988; (Suppl 2): 139–144.
5.
LeeBBNicolaidesANMyersK, et al.Venous hemodynamic changes in lower limb venous disease: the UIP consensus according to scientific evidence. Int Angiol2016; 35(3): 236–352.
6.
MasudaEOzsvathKVosslerJ, et al.The 2020 appropriate use criteria for chronic lower extremity venous disease of the American Venous Forum, the Society for Vascular Surgery, the American Vein and Lymphatic Society, and the Society of Interventional Radiology. J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord2020; 8(4): 505–525.
7.
BelrammanABootunRLaneTRA, et al.Endovenous management of varicose veins. Angiology2019; 70(5): 388–396.
8.
HongKGeorgiadesC. Radiofrequency ablation: mechanism of action and devices. J Vasc Interv Radiol2010; 21(8 Suppl): S179–S186.
9.
MorrisonNGibsonKMcEnroeS, et al.Randomized trial comparing cyanoacrylate embolization and radiofrequency ablation for incompetent great saphenous veins (VeClose). J Vasc Surg2015; 61(4): 985–994.
VasdekisSNClarkeGHNicolaidesAN. Quantification of venous reflux by means of duplex scanning. J Vasc Surg1989; 10(6): 670–677.
12.
MasudaEMKistnerRLEklofB. Prospective study of duplex scanning for venous reflux: comparison of Valsalva and pneumatic cuff techniques in the reverse Trendelenburg and standing positions. J Vasc Surg1994; 20(5): 711–720.
13.
van BemmelenPSBedfordGBeachK, et al.Quantitative segmental evaluation of venous valvular reflux with duplex ultrasound scanning. J Vasc Surg1989; 10(4): 425–431.
14.
LabropoulosNTiongsonJPryorL, et al.Definition of venous reflux in lower-extremity veins. J Vasc Surg2003; 38(4): 793–798.
15.
NeglenPEggerJF3rdOlivierJ, et al.Hemodynamic and clinical impact of ultrasound-derived venous reflux parameters. J Vasc Surg2004; 40(2): 303–310.
16.
EklofBRutherfordRBBerganJJ, et al.Revision of the CEAP classification for chronic venous disorders: consensus statement. J Vasc Surg2004; 40(6): 1248–1252.
17.
RutherfordRBPadbergFTJrComerotaAJ, et al.Venous severity scoring: an adjunct to venous outcome assessment. J Vasc Surg2000; 31(6): 1307–1312.
18.
MeissnerMHNatielloCNichollsSC. Performance characteristics of the venous clinical severity score. J Vasc Surg2002; 36(5): 889–895.
19.
VasquezMAWangJMahathanarukM, et al.The utility of the venous clinical severity score in 682 limbs treated by radiofrequency saphenous vein ablation. J Vasc Surg2007; 45(5): 1008–1014; discussion 15.
20.
KuetMLLaneTRAnwarMA, et al.Comparison of disease-specific quality of life tools in patients with chronic venous disease. Phlebology2014; 29(10): 648–653.
21.
LattimerCRRudolphiPBReckeA, et al.Comparison of four haemodynamic tests that quantify superficial venous insufficiency. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg2019; 57(4): 570–577.
22.
RudolphiPBReckeALanganEA, et al.Are sonographically measured vascular haemodynamic parameters reproducible using magnetic resonance imaging?Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg2016; 52(5): 665–672.
23.
LattimerCRAzzamMKalodikiE, et al.Quantifying saphenous recirculation in patients with primary lower extremity venous reflux. J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord2016; 4(2): 179–186.
24.
LattimerCRAzzamMKalodikiE, et al.Venous filling time using air-plethysmography correlates highly with great saphenous vein reflux time using duplex. Phlebology2014; 29(2): 90–97.
25.
Van der VeldenSKDe MaeseneerMGPichotO, et al.Postural diameter change of the saphenous trunk in chronic venous disease. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg2016; 51(6): 831–837.
26.
YamakiTNozakiMFujiwaraO, et al.Comparative evaluation of duplex-derived parameters in patients with chronic venous insufficiency: correlation with clinical manifestations. J Am Coll Surg2002; 195(6): 822–830.
27.
YangQZhaoYChenX, et al.Association between vein diameters, reflux characteristics, and clinical severity in patients with chronic venous insufficiency in Northwest China. J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord2021; 9(2): 401–408.
28.
TauraginskiiRALurieFZhdanovK, et al.Reflux volume is determined by ejected blood volume from the calf venous reservoir. J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord2020; 8(6): 1090–1096.
29.
TauraginskiiRALurieFSimakovS, et al.Gravity force is not a sole explanation of reflux flow in incompetent great saphenous vein. J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord2019; 7(5): 693–698.
30.
LurieFComerotaAEklofB, et al.Multicenter assessment of venous reflux by duplex ultrasound. J Vasc Surg2012; 55(2): 437–445.
31.
NavarroTPDelisKTRibeiroAP. Clinical and hemodynamic significance of the greater saphenous vein diameter in chronic venous insufficiency. Arch Surg2002; 137(11): 1233–1237.
32.
GibsonKMeissnerMWrightD. Great saphenous vein diameter does not correlate with worsening quality of life scores in patients with great saphenous vein incompetence. J Vasc Surg2012; 56(6): 1634–1641.
33.
LaneTRAVaratharajanLFiorentinoF, et al.Truncal varicose vein diameter and patient-reported outcome measures. Br J Surg2017; 104(12): 1648–1655.
34.
AttaranRRBhallaAMena-HurtadoCI, et al.Correlation between great saphenous length of treatment zone and diameter with improvement in symptoms after ablation. J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord2021; 9(6): 1443–1450.
