Campbell B, Chinai N, Hollering P, Wright H, McCarthy R
South Devon and Exeter Vascular Service, Royal Devon and Exeter Hospital, UK.
Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2017 Nov;99(8):624-630. doi: 10.1308/rcsann.2017.0122. Epub 2017 Jul 6.
INTRODUCTION There is evidence of effectiveness for a range of different treatment modalities for varicose veins but limited information about factors that influence treatment choice for individual patients. METHODS A postal survey was sent to 438 UK members of the Vascular Society of Great Britain and Ireland. RESULTS Overall, 251 responses were received (response rate 57%). A total of 222 respondents treated varicose veins using conventional surgery (84%), endothermal ablation (82%) and foam sclerotherapy (68%). The clinical pattern of veins appeared to have the greatest influence on treatment choice. This was followed by guidance from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, patient expectations, facilities, cost and whether treatment was carried out in the public or private sector. Respondents were asked to indicate whether each of 13 clinical 'scenarios' (eg very extensive varicose veins in both legs) would influence them towards or against using specified treatment modalities. 'Consensus' was defined as ≥80% of responses either towards or against any treatment modality; and disagreement as 41-59% both towards and against any modality (i.e. ∼50:50 split). There was consensus towards using endothermal ablation for truncal reflux, towards UGFS for localised varicose veins and towards conventional surgery for large, extensive, bilateral veins. There was consensus against UGFS for large truncal veins, and against surgery for obese patients and those with a history of venous thromboembolism. There were important disagreements about the influence of large or extensive veins, about whether patients were obese or slim and about a prior history of venous thromboembolism. CONCLUSIONS Conventional surgery is still widely available in the UK. Disagreements about treatment choice in different clinical scenarios suggest substantial variation in the treatments patients are offered. Attention to identifying subgroups in trials would help to guide treatment choice for individual patients.
引言 有证据表明,一系列不同的静脉曲张治疗方式是有效的,但关于影响个体患者治疗选择的因素的信息有限。
方法 向英国血管外科学会和爱尔兰分会的438名成员发送了邮政调查问卷。
结果 总体而言,共收到251份回复(回复率57%)。共有222名受访者采用传统手术(84%)、腔内热消融(82%)和泡沫硬化疗法(68%)治疗静脉曲张。静脉的临床模式似乎对治疗选择影响最大。其次是来自英国国家卫生与临床优化研究所的指导、患者期望、设施、成本以及治疗是在公立还是私立部门进行。受访者被要求指出13种临床“情况”(例如双腿非常广泛的静脉曲张)中的每一种是否会影响他们选择或不选择特定的治疗方式。“共识”定义为对任何治疗方式选择或不选择的回复≥80%;“分歧”定义为对任何治疗方式选择和不选择的回复为41 - 59%(即大致50:50的比例)。对于主干反流采用腔内热消融、对于局限性静脉曲张采用超声引导下泡沫硬化疗法(UGFS)以及对于大的、广泛的双侧静脉曲张采用传统手术存在共识。对于大的主干静脉不采用UGFS、对于肥胖患者和有静脉血栓栓塞病史的患者不采用手术存在共识。对于大的或广泛的静脉的影响、患者是肥胖还是苗条以及既往静脉血栓栓塞病史的影响存在重要分歧。
结论 在英国,传统手术仍然广泛可用。在不同临床情况下治疗选择的分歧表明患者所接受的治疗存在很大差异。在试验中关注识别亚组将有助于指导个体患者的治疗选择。