Side-effects and complications of foam sclerotherapy of the great and small saphenous veins: a controlled multicentre prospective study including 1025 patients
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online June, 2009
Side-effects and complications of foam sclerotherapy of the great and small saphenous veins: a controlled multicentre prospective study including 1025 patients
Increasing interest in foam sclerotherapy (FS) for saphenous insufficiency has highlighted the need to study the side-effects and complications of this treatment. The aim of this study is to better assess their nature and incidence.
Methods
A multicentre, prospective and controlled study was carried out in which patients treated with FS for great (GSV) and small saphenous veins (SSV) trunk incompetence were included. Immediate untoward events were reported. Duplex ultrasound (DUS) examination was carried out to assess all patients between the eighth and 30th day. In addition, 20% of patients were called by an external auditor.
Results
In total, 818 GSV and 207 SSV were treated in 1025 patients in 20 phlebology clinics. Ninety-nine percent of patients were controlled with DUS and non-duplex-checked patients were all called. The saphenous trunk was occluded in 90.3% of patients. Twenty-seven (2.6%) side-effects were reported: migraine (n = 8, 4 with visual disturbance); visual disturbance alone (n = 7); chest pressure alone (n = 7); and chest pressure associated with visual disturbance (n = 5). Eleven thrombo-embolic events occurred: 10 deep vein thrombosis (DVT) but only five in symptomatic patients, and one pulmonary embolism that occurred 19 days following the FS without DVT identified by DUS. One transient ischaemic stroke, with complete clinical recovery in 30 minutes, and one septicaemia with satisfactory outcome were reported as well.
Conclusion
This study demonstrates in a large sample of patients a low rate of adverse reactions after FS of great and small saphenous trunks. However, but the eventuality of exceptional but more serious complications has to be taken into account in the management of patients. A multicentre study like this one takes into account different practices and reports all possible complications, thus demonstrating the need for a common validated protocol.
CavezziA, FrulliniA, RicciS, TessariL. Treatment of varicose veins by foam sclerotherapy: two clinical series. Phlebology2002;17:13–8
2.
BelcaroGM, CesaroneMR, NicolaidesAN, Foam-sclerotherapy, surgery, sclerotherapy, and combined treatment for varicose veins: a 10-year, prospective, randomized, controlled, trial (VEDICO trial). Angiology2003;54:307–15
3.
Hamel-DesnosC, DesnosP, WollmannJC, OuvryP, MakoS, AllaertFA. 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;29:1170–5
4.
YamakiT, NozakiM, IwasakaS. Comparative study of duplex-guided foam sclerotherapy and duplex-guided liquid sclerotherapy for the treatment of superficial venous insufficiency. Dermatol Surg2004;30:718–22
5.
BarrettJM, AllenB, OckelfordA, GoldmanMP. Microfoam ultrasound-guided sclerotherapy of varicose veins in 100 legs. Dermatol Surg2004;30:6–12
6.
SchadeckM. Sclérose de la petite veine saphène: comment éviter les mauvais résultats?Phlébologie2004; 57:165–69
7.
BountouroglouDG, AzzamM, KakkosSK, PathmarajahM, YoungP, GeroulakosG. Ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy combined with sapheno-femoral ligation compared to surgical treatment of varicose veins: early results of a randomised controlled trial. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg2006;31:93–100
8.
WrightD, GobinJP, BradburyAW, on behalf of the European phase III investigators group. Varisolve® polidocanol microfoam compared with surgery or sclerotherapy in management of varicose veins in the presence of trunk vein incompetence: European randomized controlled trial. Phlebology2006;21:180–90
SicaM, BiasiG, GeorgeE. Méthode simplifiée d'injection endoveineuse de micromousse de Trombovar® à 1% par cathéter court (Méthode MS): une efficacité durable confirmée par les résultats à 2 ans. Phlébologie2006;59: 339–42
12.
FerraraF, BernbachHR. Les résultats de la sclérothérapie: suivi de 1000 crosses de la grande veine saphène à 10 ans. Phlébologie2006;59:77–83
13.
CeulenRP, Bullens-GoessensYI, Pi-Van De VenneSJ, NelemansPJ, VeraartJC, SommerA. 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 one-year follow-up. Dermatol Surg2007;33:276–81
14.
Hamel-DesnosC, OuvryP, BenigniJP, Comparison of 1% and 3% polidocanol foam in ultrasound guided sclerotherapy of the great saphenous vein: a randomised, double-blind trial with two year-follow-up. ‘The 3/1 Study’. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg2007;34:723–9
15.
JiaX, MowattG, BurrJM, CassarK, CookJ, FraserC. Systematic review of foam sclerotherapy for varicose veins. BJS2007;94:925–36
16.
RabeE, OttoJ, SchliephakeD, PannierF. Efficacy and safety of great saphenous vein sclerotherapy using standardised polidocanol foam (ESAF): a randomised controlled multicentre clinical trial. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg2008;35:238–45
17.
OuvryP, AllaertFA, DesnosP, Hamel-DesnosC. Efficacy of polidocanol foam versus liquid in sclerotherapy of the great saphenous vein: a multicentre randomised controlled trial with a two-year follow-up. EJVES2008; 36:366–70
18.
TessariL, CavezziA, FrulliniA. Preliminary experience with a new sclerosing foam in the treatment of varicose veins. Dermatol Surg2001;27:58–60
19.
FrulliniA, CavezziA. Sclerosing foam in the treatment of varicose veins and telangiectases: history and analysis of safety and complications. Dermatol Surg2002;28:11–5
20.
VarcoePF. Ultrasound guided sclerotherapy: efficacy, adverse effects and dosing. An international survey. Aust N Z J Phlebol2003;7:17–24
21.
BenigniJP, RatinahiranaH. Mousse de polidocaol et migraine à aura. Phlébologie2003;56:289–91
22.
BarrettJM, AllenB, OckelfordA, GoldmanMP. Microfoam ultrasound-guided sclerotherapy of varicose veins in 100 legs. Dermatol Surg2004;30:6–12
23.
BarrettJM, AllenB, OckelfordA, GoldmanMP. Microfoam ultrasound-guided sclerotherapy treatment for varicose veins in a subgroup with diameters at the junction of 10 mm or greater compared with a subgroup of less than 10 mm. Dermatol Surg2004;30: 1386–90
24.
GuexJ-J, AllaertFA, GilletJ-L, ChleirF. Immediate and mid-term complications of sclerotherapy. Report of a prospective multicentric registry of 12,173 sclerotherapy sessions. Dermatol Surg2005;31:123–8
25.
AlòsJ, CarreñoP, LópezJA, EstadellaB, Serra-PratM, Marinel-LoJ. Efficacy and safety of sclerotherapy using polidocanol foam: a controlled clinical trial. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg2006;31:101–7
GoldmanPM, BerganJJ, GuexJJ. Complications and Adverse Sequelae of Sclerotherapy, in Sclerotherapy, Treatment of Varicose and Telangiectatic Leg Veins. 4th edn, Mosby Elsevier, 2007:189–244
29.
MyersKA, JolleyD, CloughA, KirwanJ. Outcome of ultrasound-guided sclerotherapy for varicose veins: medium-term results assessed by ultrasound surveillance. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg2007;33:116–21
30.
MunavalliGS, WeissRA. Complications of sclerotherapy. Semin Cutan Med Surg2007;26:22–8
31.
MorrisonN, NeuhardtDL, RogersCR, Comparisons of side effects using air and carbon dioxide foam for endovenous chemical ablation. J Vasc Surg2008; 47:830–6
32.
BushRG, DerrickM, ManjoneyD. Major neurological events following foam sclerotherapy. Phlebology2008; 23:189–92
33.
CeulenRP, SommerA, VernooyK. Microembolism during foam sclerotherapy of varicose veins. N Engl J Med2008;358:1525–6
34.
CappelliM, Molino LovaR, ErminiS, GanglandsI, GiannelliF, ZamboniP. Haemodynamics of the sapheno-femoral complex: an operational diagnosis of proximal femoral valve function. Int Angiol2006;25:356–60
35.
PorterJM, MonetaGL, International Consensus Committee on Chronic Venous Disease. Reporting standards in venous disease: an update. J Vasc Surg1995; 27:635–45
36.
EklöfB, RutherfordRB, BerganJJ, and the American Venous Forum International Ad Hoc Committee for Revision of the CEAP Classification. Revision of the CEAP classification for chronic venous disorders: consensus statement. J Vasc Surg2004;40:1248–52
37.
BreuFX, GuggenbichlerS, WollmannJC. Second European Consensus Meeting on Foam Sclerotherapy. Duplex ultrasound and efficacy criteria in foam sclerotherapy from the 2nd European Consensus Meeting on Foam Sclerotherapy 2006, Tegernsee, Germany. Vasa2008;37:90–5
38.
NataliJ, FarmanT. Implications medico-légales au cours du traitement sclérothérapique des varices. J Mal Vasc1996;21:227–32
39.
HanischF, MüllerT, KrivocucaM, WinterhollerM. Stroke following variceal sclerotherapy. Eur J Med Res2004;9:282–4
40.
MeierB, LockJE. Contemporary management of patent foramen ovale. Circulation2003;107:5–9
41.
MorrisonN, CavezziA, BerganJ, PartschH. Letter to the editor regarding ‘Stroke after varicose vein foam injection sclerotherapy’. J Vasc Surg2007;44:224–5
42.
CabreraJ, CabreraJJr, Garcia-OlmedoMA, RedondoP. Treatment of venous malformations with sclerosant in microfoam form. Arch Dermatol2003;139:1409–16
43.
HillD, HamiltonR, FungT. Assessment of techniques to reduce sclerosant foam migration during ultrasound-guided sclerotherapy of the Great Saphenous vein. J Vasc Surg2008;48:934–9
44.
KünzlbergerB, PieckC, AltmeyerP, StückerM. Migraine ophthalmique with reversible scotomas after sclerotherapy with liquid 1% polidocanol. Dermatol Surg2006;32:1410–3
45.
DowsonA, MullenMJ, PeatfieldR, Migraine Intervention with STARFlex Technology (MIST) trial: a prospective, multicenter, double-blind, sham-controlled trial to evaluate the effectiveness of patent foramen ovale closure with STARFlex septal repair implant to resolve refractory migraine headache. Circulation2008; 117:1397–404
46.
Hamel-DesnosC, GuiasB, QuéhéP, Foam sclerotherapy of saphenous veins with or without medical support stocking (compression) – Biological effects of foam sclerotherapy – Randomized study [abstract]. Ninth Annual Meeting of the European Venous Forum, 26–28 June 2008, Barcelona
47.
GilletJ-L, PerrinM, CaymanR. Thromboses veineuses superficielles des membres inférieurs. Etude prospective portant sur 100 patients. J Mal Vasc2001;1:16–22
48.
MacDonaldPS, KahnSR, MillerN, ObrandD. Short-term natural history of isolated gastrocnemius and soleal vein thrombosis. J Vasc Surg2003;37:523–7
49.
GilletJL, PerrinM, AllaertFA. Short and mid-term outcome of isolated symptomatic muscular calf vein thrombosis. J Vasc Surg2007;46:513–9
50.
van RijAM, ChaiJ, HillGB, ChristieRA. Incidence of deep vein thrombosis after varicose vein surgery. Br J Surg2004;91:1582–5
51.
WeissRA, WeissMA. Controlled radiofrequency endovenous occlusion using a unique radiofrequency catheter under duplex guidance to eliminate saphenous varicose vein reflux: a two-year follow-up. Dermatol Surg2002;28:38–42
52.
KistnerRL. Endovascular obliteration of the greater saphenous vein: the Closure procedure. Jpn J Phlebol2002;13:325–33
53.
HingoraniAP, AscherE, MarkevichN, Deep venous thrombosis after radiofrequency ablation of greater saphenous vein: a word of caution. J Vasc Surg2004;40:500–4
54.
MerchantRF, PichotO, MyersKA. Four-year follow-up on endovascular radiofrequency obliteration of great saphenous reflux. Dermatol Surg2005;31:129–34
55.
MinRJ, ZimmetSE, IsaacsMN, ForrestalMD. Endovenous laser treatment of the incompetent greater saphenous vein. J Vasc Interv Radiol2001;12:1167–71
ProebstleTM, GülD, KarglA, KnopJ. Endovenous laser treatment of the lesser saphenous vein with a 940-nm diode laser: early results. Dermatol Surg2003;29:357–61
58.
MozesG, KalraM, CarmoM, SwensonL, GloviczkiP. Extension of saphenous thrombus into the femoral vein: a potential complication of new endovenous ablation techniques. J Vasc Surg2005;41:130–5
