Mousa Albeir Y, Broce Mike, Yacoub Michael, AbuRahma Ali F
Department of Surgery, Robert C. Byrd Health Sciences Center, West Virginia University, Charleston, WV.
Department of Surgery, Robert C. Byrd Health Sciences Center, West Virginia University, Charleston, WV.
Ann Vasc Surg. 2016 Jul;34:144-51. doi: 10.1016/j.avsg.2015.11.036. Epub 2016 May 11.
Treatment of venous ulcers is demanding for patients, as well as clinicians, and the investigation of underlying venous hypertension is the cornerstone of therapy. We propose that occult iliac vein stenosis should be ruled out by iliac vein interrogation (IVI) in patients with advanced venous stasis.
We conducted a systematic retrospective analysis of a consecutive series of patients who presented with CEAP (clinical, etiological, anatomical, and pathophysiological) 6 venous disease. All patients had great saphenous vein ablation, compressive treatment, wound care (including Unna boot compression), and perforator closure using ablation therapy. Iliac vein stenosis was defined as ≥50% stenosis in cross-sectional surface area on intravascular ultrasound. Primary outcomes include time of venous ulcer healing and/or measurable change in the Venous Clinical Severity Score.
Twenty-two patients with CEAP 6 venous disease met the inclusion criteria (active ulcers >1.5 cm in diameter). The average age and body mass index were 62.2 ± 9.2 years and 41.7 ± 16.7, respectively. The majority were female (72.7%) with common comorbidities, such as hyperlipidemia (54.5%), hypertension (36.4%), and diabetes mellitus (27.3%). Twenty-nine ulcers with an average diameter of 3.4 ± 1.9 cm and a depth of 2.2 ± 0.5 mm were treated. The majority of the ulcers occurred on the left limb (n = 17, 58.6%). Average perforator venous reflux was 3.6 ± 0.8 sec, while common femoral reflux was 1.8 ± 1.6. The majority (n = 19, 64.5%) of the perforator veins were located at the base of the ulcer, while the remainder (n = 10, 34.5%) were within 2 cm from the base. Of the 13 patients who underwent IVI, 8 patients (61.5%) had stenosis >50% that was corrected with iliac vein angioplasty and stenting (IVAS). There was a strong trend toward shorter healing time in the IVI group (7.9 ± 9.5 weeks) than for patients in the no iliac vein interrogation (NIVI) group (20.2 ± 15.3 weeks, P = 0.055). The final VCCS score was not significantly different (IVI = 7.9 ± 9.5 vs. NIVI = 10.0 ± 6.5, P = 0.578). However, compared with the NIVI group, the healing time for patients who actually received IVAS was marginally lower (5.8 ± 3.6 weeks, P = 0.075) and final VCCS was significantly lower (2.4 ± 2.9, P = 0.031). Veins that received IVI and IVAS remained patent and the associated ulcers were healed (100%).
The small sample size and retrospective design limit the strength of the conclusions but the findings suggest that further studies are needed to define the exact role of IVI including angioplasty/stenting for patients with chronic venous ulcers.
静脉溃疡的治疗对患者和临床医生而言都颇具挑战性,而对潜在静脉高压的检查是治疗的基石。我们建议,对于晚期静脉淤滞患者,应通过髂静脉检查(IVI)排除隐匿性髂静脉狭窄。
我们对一系列连续的患有CEAP(临床、病因、解剖和病理生理)6级静脉疾病的患者进行了系统的回顾性分析。所有患者均接受了大隐静脉消融、压迫治疗、伤口护理(包括Unna靴压迫)以及使用消融疗法封闭交通静脉。髂静脉狭窄定义为血管内超声显示横截面积狭窄≥50%。主要结局包括静脉溃疡愈合时间和/或静脉临床严重程度评分的可测量变化。
22例患有CEAP 6级静脉疾病的患者符合纳入标准(活动性溃疡直径>1.5 cm)。平均年龄和体重指数分别为62.2±9.2岁和41.7±16.7。大多数为女性(72.7%),伴有常见的合并症,如高脂血症(54.5%)、高血压(36.4%)和糖尿病(27.3%)。共治疗了29处溃疡,平均直径为3.4±1.9 cm,深度为2.2±0.5 mm。大多数溃疡发生在左下肢(n = 17,58.6%)。平均交通静脉反流时间为3.6±0.8秒,而股总静脉反流时间为1.8±1.6秒。大多数交通静脉(n = 19,64.5%)位于溃疡底部,其余(n = 10,34.5%)位于距底部2 cm范围内。在接受IVI的13例患者中,8例(61.5%)狭窄>50%,通过髂静脉血管成形术和支架置入术(IVAS)得到纠正。IVI组的愈合时间(7.9±9.5周)比未进行髂静脉检查(NIVI)组的患者(20.2±15.3周,P = 0.055)有缩短的强烈趋势。最终的VCCS评分无显著差异(IVI = 7.9±9.5 vs. NIVI = 10.0±6.5,P = 0.578)。然而,与NIVI组相比,实际接受IVAS的患者愈合时间略短(5.8±3.6周,P = 0.075),最终VCCS显著更低(2.4±2.9,P = 0.031)。接受IVI和IVAS的静脉保持通畅,相关溃疡愈合(100%)。
样本量小和回顾性设计限制了结论的力度,但研究结果表明,需要进一步研究以确定IVI(包括血管成形术/支架置入术)对慢性静脉溃疡患者的确切作用。