Abstract

    Open Access Research Article Article ID: IJVSM-8-140

    The multimodal treatment approaches to varicose veins: Preservation versus thermal ablation of the incompetent great saphenous vein

    Ihar Ihnatovich*, Genadz Kandratsenka, Julia Dabravolskaj, Katsiaryna Ihnatovich and Natallia Novikava

    Objective: To compare the clinical efficacy of Ambulatory Selective Varices Ablation under Local Anesthesia (ASVAL) and Endovenous Laser Ablation (EVLA) with concomitant phlebectomy in patients with the incompetent Great Saphenous Vein (GSV).

    Design: “Prospective Case Series study (C2-C3 patients) with 2 and 5 years follow-up.

    Methods: This was a prospective observational cohort study in a single center. Seventy-six patients (59 females) with GSV incompetence and C2-C3 were included in the prospective consecutive case study. The diameter of GSV at the 15-cm below the SFJ level was the main criterion to identify two groups of patients. Thirty-three patients (25 females, mean age 37.03) with the GSV diameter ≤6 mm were treated with ASVAL. Forty-three patients (34 females, mean age 46.19) with the GSV diameter >6 mm were treated by EVLA with concomitant phlebectomy. Clinical and functional outcomes measured by Venous Clinical Severity Score (VCSS) and clinical recurrence-free rate according to the classification of recurrent varicose veins after treatment (PREVAIT) were analyzed in 2 years follow-up. The clinical recurrence-free rate was analyzed in 5 years follow-up.

    Results: 2-year follow-up was detected a significant decrease in the postoperative VCSS in the ASVAL and the EVLA group (p< 0.001). There was no statistically significant difference between both groups in VCCS in 2 years post-operation (p= 0.681). Frequency of recurrence did not differ between ASVAL (18.8%) and EVLA (21.4%) groups 2 years after treatment (p= 0.776) and the diameter of the GSV significantly decreased in the ASVAL group (5.48 vs 5.13, p= 0.008). The 5-year follow-up was detected recurrences in 40.0% of patients ASVAL group and 45.6% EVLA group (p = 0.668). 

    Conclusions: Both ASVAL and EVLA effectively improve the disease severity in the groups of patients, selected according to the GSV diameter (≤ 6 mm or > 6 mm).

    Keywords:

    Published on: Jan 4, 2022 Pages: 1-7

    Full Text PDF Full Text HTML DOI: 10.17352/2455-5452.000040
    CrossMark Publons Harvard Library HOLLIS Search IT Semantic Scholar Get Citation Base Search Scilit OAI-PMH ResearchGate Academic Microsoft GrowKudos Universite de Paris UW Libraries SJSU King Library SJSU King Library NUS Library McGill DET KGL BIBLiOTEK JCU Discovery Universidad De Lima WorldCat VU on WorldCat

    Indexing/Archiving

    Global Views

    Case Reports

    Peertechz Tweets

    Pinterest on IJVSM

    Google Reviews 11