These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: A systematic review of the treatment of residual below the knee venous reflux after endovenous thermal ablation of the great saphenous vein.
    Author: Sussman MS, Ryon EL, Bahga A, Almeida S, Almeida JI.
    Journal: J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord; 2022 Jan; 10(1):233-240. PubMed ID: 34425265.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: Great saphenous vein (GSV) antireflux procedures have evolved during the past few decades to reduce elevated venous pressure. Untreated reflux in the below knee (BK) GSV (BK-GSV) can lead to persistent venous hypertension and deterioration of the venous circulation. The purpose of the present systematic review was to study the influence of BK-GSV intervention on venous disease progression. METHODS: A search was conducted, adhering to the PRISMA (preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses) guidelines. The PubMed and Embase databases were searched and cross-referenced. Studies were included if they had met the inclusion criterion of BK-GSV disease as a primary or secondary outcome. Two of the authors independently determined the eligibility and extracted the relevant data. RevMan, version 5.3 (Cochrane Training, London, UK), and SPSS (IBM Corp, Armonk, NY) were used for statistical computation. RESULTS: Fifteen studies that had assessed BK-GSV reflux recurrence after ablative intervention were included in our analysis. Of the 15 studies, 6 had assessed patients after above knee (AK) high ligation and stripping (HLS), 7 after AK endovenous laser ablation (AK-EVLA), and 2 after AK- and BK-EVLA (AK+BK EVLA). In total, 525 limbs had undergone HLS, 696 AK-EVLA, and 147 AK+BK EVLA. AK+BK EVLA was associated with significantly lower odds of BK-GSV reflux recurrence compared with AK-EVLA only (odds ratio [OR], 0.1857; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.076-0.4734; P < .0001). Although the odds of recurrent BK-GSV reflux appeared to be greater for patients who had undergone AK-HLS compared with AK+BK HLS, the difference was not statistically significant (OR, 0.62; CI, 0.27-1.43; P = .69). Finally, no statistically significant difference was observed in BK-GSV reflux recurrence between patients receiving AK-EVLA and those receiving AK-HLS (OR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.52-1.39; P = .31). CONCLUSIONS: Axial hydrostatic reflux from the groin to ankle is best controlled with AK+BK-GSV ablation. However, GSV ablation can result in saphenous nerve injury. For C4 to C6 disease, more aggressive treatment of the AK+BK-GSV is justified if the duplex ultrasound findings demonstrate groin to ankle reflux. Thermal ablation of the BK-GSV has a lower incidence of saphenous nerve injury than does BK saphenous stripping. More randomized controlled trials are needed to answer questions involving disease recurrence and the best techniques to mitigate these recurrences.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]