Improvement of dynamic venous function after thermal ablation with steam vein occlusion – 6-weeks and 1-year follow-up after 167 treatments

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

In this paper, the method of steam vein occlusion for the treatment of the great/small saphenous vein (GSV/SSV) was analyzed in terms of a therapeutic influence on the dynamic parameters of global vein function, its effects on subjective symptoms based on chronic venous insufficiency (CVI) and the side effects of the steam vein sclerosis (SVS). It has been questioned whether the effects of this method lead to a recommendation for routine clinical practice.

METHODS:

The venous drainage and the venous refilling time (T₀) of the leg treated were determined by photoplethysmography (Elcat, Wolfratshausen, Germany) before, six weeks and one year after the intervention to examine the effects on global venous function. Further changes of clinical symptoms and findings were assessed by the Venous Clinical Severity Score (VCSS), preoperatively and after one year, and the complication rate at 6-week follow-up was monitored.

RESULTS:

The SVS was performed on 167 veins (GSV: 124; SSV: 43) in a total of 156 patients. Eight patients (5.1%) did not attend the 6-week follow-up, while 29 patients (18.6%) were lost in the 1-year follow-up. Patients were suffering from symptoms such as leg pain and leg edema, which resulted in a VCSS of 9.4 (cumulated mean score of all patients) preoperatively. The T₀ was reduced to mean values of 20.6 s (GSV cohort) and 21 s (SSV cohort). The VCSS improved to 6.0 after one year. This correlated with the hemodynamic parameters. The T₀ increased in the GSV cohort after six weeks to 31.8 s, p < 0.001, and showed a nonsignificant improvement to 32.2 s, p = 0.509, in the 1-year check. The T₀ also increased in the SSV cohort significantly after 6 weeks to 30.1 s, p < 0.001, and showed a nonsignificant reduction after one year, p = 0.289. A total of 71%of the GSV and 69.8%of the SSV of the patients involved no complications following the treatment. Light complications (grade 1) occurred (reddening, hematoma, hyperpigmentation) in the majority: 24.2%of the GSV and 18.6%of the SSV. We noticed one grade 3 complication with thrombosis in the SSV cohort, which led to a pulmonary embolism. Forty-seven complete questionnaires were analyzed (responder rate: 28.1%); 40.4%of the patients had light complaints after the treatment, such as pain, warmth or local pressure sensations (Fig. 7); 63%of those patients noticed only slight pain at a maximum of 3 out of 10. The majority (91%) would recommend this procedure.

CONCLUSION:

The SVS revealed endoluminal catheter-based intervention to abolish venous reflux of the G/SSV as safe. As one therapeutic target is to eliminate venous reflux, effectiveness of a method cannot be based on sonographic data alone; one must further assess patients’ symptoms and dynamic venous function. This data shows an improvement of patients’ symptoms which correlated well with the improvement of the venous function in digital photoplethysmography. The SVS can be recommended as a catheter-based treatment in the future.