Gonda Venous Center, Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA.
Gonda Venous Center, Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA.
J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord. 2023 Sep;11(5):916-920. doi: 10.1016/j.jvsv.2023.03.015. Epub 2023 Apr 7.
Microfoam ablation (MFA) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) are both approved by the Food and Drug Administration for treatment of proximal saphenous truncal veins. The objective of our study was to compare early postoperative outcomes between MFA and RFA following treatment of incompetent thigh saphenous veins.
A retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database was conducted of patients who underwent treatment of incompetent great saphenous veins (GSVs) or anterior accessory saphenous veins (AASVs) in the thigh. All the patients underwent duplex ultrasound of the treated leg at 48 to 72 hours postoperatively. Patients were excluded from analysis if concomitant stab phlebectomy was performed. Demographic data, CEAP (clinical, etiologic, anatomic, pathophysiologic) class, venous clinical severity score (VCSS), and adverse events were recorded.
Between June 2018 and September 2022, 784 consecutive limbs (RFA, n = 560; MFA, n = 224) underwent venous closure for symptomatic reflux. A total of 200 consecutive thigh GSVs and ASVs treated within the study period using either MFA (n = 100) or RFA (n = 100) were identified. The patients were predominantly women (69%) with a mean age of 64 years. The preoperative CEAP classification was similar between the MFA and RFA groups. The mean preoperative VCSS was 9.4 ± 2.6 for the RFA patients and 9.9 ± 3.3 for the MFA patients. Among the RFA patients, the GSV was treated in 98% and the AASV in 2% compared with the GSV in 83% and the AASV in 17% in the MFA group (P < .001). The mean operative time was 42.4 ± 15.4 minutes in the RFA group and 33.8 ±16.9 minutes in the MFA group (P < .001). The median follow-up was 64 days for the study cohort. The mean postoperative VCSS declined to 7.3 ± 2.1 in the RFA group and 7.8 ± 2.9 in the MFA group. Complete closure occurred in 100% of the limbs after RFA and 90% after MFA (P = .005). Eight veins were partially closed and two remained patent following MFA. The incidence of superficial phlebitis was 6% and 15% (P = .06) after RFA and MFA, respectively. Overall, symptomatic relief was 90% following RFA and 89.5% following MFA. The complete ulcer healing rate for the entire cohort was 77.8%. Deep venous proximal thrombus extension (RFA, 1%; vs MFA, 4%; P = .37) and remote deep vein thrombosis (RFA, 0%; vs MFA, 2%; P = .5) showed a trend toward being higher following MFA but the difference did not reach statistical significance. All were asymptomatic and resolved with short-term anticoagulation therapy.
MFA and RFA are both safe and effective for treating incompetent thigh saphenous veins, with excellent symptomatic relief and a low incidence of postprocedure adverse thrombotic events. RFA resulted in improved complete closure rates following initial treatment compared with MFA. The operative times were shorter with MFA. Both modalities can be used for patients with active venous ulcers with good healing rates. Longer term studies are required to characterize the durability of MFA closure for above knee truncal veins.
微泡消融(MFA)和射频消融(RFA)均已获得食品和药物管理局的批准,用于治疗近端隐静脉主干。我们的研究目的是比较 MFA 和 RFA 治疗股部功能不全大隐静脉后的早期术后结果。
对前瞻性维护的数据库进行回顾性分析,纳入接受治疗的功能不全大隐静脉(GSV)或前辅助隐静脉(AASV)的患者。所有患者均在术后 48 至 72 小时内行治疗肢体的超声双功检查。如果同时行切开静脉切除术,则排除患者进行分析。记录人口统计学数据、CEAP(临床、病因、解剖、病理生理)分级、静脉临床严重程度评分(VCSS)和不良事件。
2018 年 6 月至 2022 年 9 月,784 条肢体(RFA,n=560;MFA,n=224)接受静脉闭合治疗有症状反流。在研究期间,使用 MFA(n=100)或 RFA(n=100)治疗的连续 200 条股部 GSV 和 ASV 符合入选标准。患者主要为女性(69%),平均年龄 64 岁。MFA 和 RFA 组的术前 CEAP 分级相似。RFA 组患者的平均术前 VCSS 为 9.4±2.6,MFA 组为 9.9±3.3。在 RFA 组中,98%治疗 GSV,2%治疗 AASV,而在 MFA 组中,83%治疗 GSV,17%治疗 AASV(P<0.001)。RFA 组的平均手术时间为 42.4±15.4 分钟,MFA 组为 33.8±16.9 分钟(P<0.001)。研究队列的中位随访时间为 64 天。RFA 组术后 VCSS 平均下降至 7.3±2.1,MFA 组下降至 7.8±2.9。RFA 后 100%的肢体完全闭合,MFA 后 90%的肢体完全闭合(P=0.005)。MFA 后有 8 根静脉部分闭塞,2 根静脉仍通畅。RFA 和 MFA 后浅静脉炎的发生率分别为 6%和 15%(P=0.06)。RFA 和 MFA 后症状缓解率分别为 90%和 89.5%。整个队列的完全溃疡愈合率为 77.8%。RFA 组深静脉近端血栓延伸(1%;vs MFA 组,4%;P=0.37)和远处深静脉血栓(RFA,0%;vs MFA,2%;P=0.5)有更高的趋势,但差异无统计学意义。所有病例均无症状,短期抗凝治疗后血栓均溶解。
MFA 和 RFA 治疗股部功能不全大隐静脉均安全有效,症状缓解良好,术后血栓形成不良事件发生率低。与 MFA 相比,RFA 可提高初始治疗后的完全闭合率。MFA 手术时间较短。两种方法均可用于伴有良好愈合率的活动性静脉溃疡患者。需要进一步的长期研究来评估 MFA 闭合股部主干静脉的耐久性。