Radysh Roman V, Shaprynskyi Vasyl V
STATE INSTITUTION OF SCIENCE «CENTRE OF INNOVATIVE HEALTHCARE TECHNOLOGIES» STATE ADMINISTRATIVE DEPARTMENT, KYIV, UKRAINE; LVIV REGIONAL CLINICAL HOSPITAL, LVIV, UKRAINE; CLINIC FOR VASCULAR SURGERY AND PHLEBOLOGY «REVASCO», LVIV, UKRAINE.
STATE INSTITUTION OF SCIENCE «CENTRE OF INNOVATIVE HEALTHCARE TECHNOLOGIES» STATE ADMINISTRATIVE DEPARTMENT, KYIV, UKRAINE.
Wiad Lek. 2025;78(6):1054-1058. doi: 10.36740/WLek/207364.
Aim: To evaluate the outcomes of patients who underwent two different high-frequency techniques of varicose vein endovenous ablation in the great saphenous vein (GSV) region (radiofrequency ablation [RFA] or high-frequency endovenous welding [HFEW]), and to find out the options to improve long-term results.
Materials and Methods: The retrospective study enrolled 120 patients with primary varicose veins in the GSV region with CEAP stages C2-C6, treated in two private centers and operated on by a single operator from 2019 to 2021. The enrolled sample was subdivided into RFA (VNUS ClosureFast [n=58]) and HFEW ("SVARMED", Ukraine [n=62]) groups. Primary (such as occlusion rates) and secondary outcomes (such as postoperative pain [by VAS scale], complications, and recurrence rates) were assessed at 7 days, and at 3, 6, and 12 months postprocedurally.
Results: Both RFA and HFEW techniques showed high occlusion rates at 12 months postoperatively (96% and 97%, respectively [p=1,000]). The adverse events and perioperative complication rates were low and comparable between the two studied groups. Recurrence of varicose veins at the 12-month follow-up was numerically, but non-significantly, higher in the RFA group compared to HFEW (total: 14% vs. 6%, respectively [p=0,230]; junction source: 10% vs. 3%, respectively [p=0,154]).
Conclusions: Ablation of the GSV in patients with varicose vein disease by RFA and HFEW showed comparable early and midterm results with high occlusion rates at 12 months postoperatively. Recurrences in the RFA group, being numerically higher compared to the HFEW group, were primarily caused by new reflux coming from the femoral junction. HFEW requires further research for technical improvement and widespread implementation in practice.
旨在评估在大隐静脉(GSV)区域接受两种不同高频大隐静脉腔内消融技术(射频消融[RFA]或高频腔内焊接[HFEW])的患者的治疗效果,并找出改善长期疗效的方法。
材料与方法:这项回顾性研究纳入了120例GSV区域原发性静脉曲张且CEAP分级为C2 - C6级的患者,于2019年至2021年在两个私立中心接受治疗,且由同一名医生进行手术。纳入的样本被分为RFA组(VNUS ClosureFast[n = 58])和HFEW组(乌克兰的“SVARMED”[n = 62])。在术后7天以及术后3、6和12个月评估主要结局(如闭塞率)和次要结局(如术后疼痛[采用视觉模拟评分法]、并发症和复发率)。
结果:RFA和HFEW技术在术后12个月均显示出高闭塞率(分别为96%和97%[p = 1.000])。两个研究组的不良事件和围手术期并发症发生率均较低且相当。在12个月随访时,RFA组大隐静脉曲张的复发率在数值上高于HFEW组,但差异无统计学意义(总体分别为14%和6%[p = 0.230];交界源分别为10%和3%[p = 0.154])。
结论:RFA和HFEW对静脉曲张患者的大隐静脉进行消融,在术后12个月显示出相似的早期和中期效果,闭塞率高。RFA组的复发率在数值上高于HFEW组,主要是由来自股静脉交界处的新反流引起的。HFEW需要进一步研究以改进技术并在实践中广泛应用。