Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA.
Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA.
J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord. 2022 Nov;10(6):1267-1271. doi: 10.1016/j.jvsv.2022.06.018. Epub 2022 Aug 9.
Venous insufficiency in the small saphenous vein (SSV) is significantly less common than venous insufficiency in the great saphenous vein; the impact of popliteal vein reflux on SSV closure procedural outcomes has yet to be studied.
A retrospective analysis was performed on 150 SSV closure procedures from 2015 to 2019. Preoperative demographic analysis was performed, after which univariate analyses were performed for postoperative occlusion rates and combined rates of endothermal heat-induced thrombus (EHIT) and endovenous foam-induced thrombus (EFIT).
The cohort had a mean age of 58 years, and 116 (77%) were female. Fifty-four patients had C2 disease, 76 had C3 disease, 15 had C4 disease, 1 had C5 disease, and 4 had C6 disease. Twenty-three patients (15.3%) were noted to have popliteal vein reflux on their initial venous insufficiency ultrasound study, compared with 127 (84.6%) who did not. Treatment modalities included 84 radiofrequency ablations (56.0%), 37 polidocanol endovenous microfoam (24.6%), and 29 laser ablations (19.3%). When comparing patients with popliteal vein reflux with those without, there was no significant difference in the occlusion rates at their immediate postoperative visit (99.2% vs 95.6%) or at their 6-month postoperative visit (92.1% vs 91.3%). EHIT/EFIT was noted in 4 of the 23 patients with popliteal vein reflux compared with 4 of the 127 patients without popliteal vein reflux (17.3% vs 3.1%; P = .01). All eight instances of EHIT/EFIT were classified as either arteriovenous fistula class I or II EHIT or EFIT, and all were successfully treated without progression to deep vein thrombosis.
The presence of popliteal vein reflux has no impact on postoperative occlusion rates at 6 months; however, it is associated with a significantly increased rate in EHIT and EFIT. Patients should be counseled on this increased risk should they undergo SSV treatment with known popliteal vein reflux.
小隐静脉(SSV)的静脉功能不全明显比大隐静脉的静脉功能不全少见; 腘静脉反流对 SSV 闭合术治疗结果的影响尚未得到研究。
对 2015 年至 2019 年期间进行的 150 例 SSV 闭合术进行回顾性分析。进行术前人口统计学分析,然后对术后闭塞率和内热诱导血栓(EHIT)和静脉内泡沫诱导血栓(EFIT)的联合率进行单变量分析。
该队列的平均年龄为 58 岁,其中 116 例(77%)为女性。54 例患者患有 C2 疾病,76 例患有 C3 疾病,15 例患有 C4 疾病,1 例患有 C5 疾病,4 例患有 C6 疾病。在最初的静脉功能不全超声研究中,23 例(15.3%)患者存在腘静脉反流,而 127 例(84.6%)患者没有。治疗方式包括 84 例射频消融术(56.0%)、37 例聚多卡醇静脉内微泡(24.6%)和 29 例激光消融术(19.3%)。比较有腘静脉反流的患者和没有腘静脉反流的患者,术后即刻就诊时的闭塞率无显著差异(99.2%比 95.6%)或术后 6 个月就诊时的闭塞率无显著差异(92.1%比 91.3%)。在 23 例有腘静脉反流的患者中,有 4 例出现 EHIT/EFIT,而在 127 例无腘静脉反流的患者中,有 4 例出现 EHIT/EFIT(17.3%比 3.1%;P=0.01)。EHIT/EFIT 的 8 例均为动脉静脉瘘 I 级或 II 级 EHIT 或 EFIT,均成功治疗,无深静脉血栓形成进展。
腘静脉反流的存在对术后 6 个月的闭塞率无影响;然而,它与 EHIT 和 EFIT 的发生率显著增加有关。对于已知有腘静脉反流的 SSV 治疗,应告知患者这种风险增加。