Journal of Vascular Surgery
Volume 45, Issue 5 , Pages 1008-1015.e2, May 2007

The utility of the venous clinical severity score in 682 limbs treated by radiofrequency saphenous vein ablation

Presented at the Eastern Vascular Society Meeting, Washington, DC, Sep 28-30, 2006.

  • Michael A. Vasquez, MD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Surgery, State University of New York (SUNY) at Buffalo, NY, USA
    • Corresponding Author InformationReprint requests: Michael A. Vasquez, MD, FACS, RVT, Department of Surgery, SUNY at Buffalo, 415 Tremont St, North Tonawanda, NY 14120
  • ,
  • Jiping Wang, MD, PhD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Surgery, State University of New York (SUNY) at Buffalo, NY, USA
    • Department of Biostatistics, State University of New York (SUNY) at Buffalo, NY, USA
  • ,
  • Marchyan Mahathanaruk, BS

      Affiliations

    • Kirksville College of Osteopathic Medicine, A.T. Still University, Kirksville, Mo, USA
  • ,
  • Glenn Buczkowski, RPAC

      Affiliations

    • Physician Assistant Program, Daemen College, and Division of Vascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, SUNY at BuffaloNY
  • ,
  • Esther Sprehe, MS, ANP

      Affiliations

    • School of Nursing, Nurse Practitioner Program, State University of New York (SUNY) at Buffalo, NY, USA
  • ,
  • Hasan H. Dosluoglu, MD

      Affiliations

    • VA Western NY Healthcare System, Amherst, NY

Received 3 October 2006; accepted 21 December 2006.

Objectives

The goal of endovenous ablation is to reduce the symptoms associated with chronic venous insufficiency. This prospective study was designed to apply the venous clinical severity score to limbs before and after endovenous saphenous vein radiofrequency ablation and to identify risk factors associated with treatment failure.

Methods

Between September 2003 and March 2005, 499 patients underwent 682 saphenous vein radiofrequency ablation procedures. Preoperative venous clinical severity scores were documented. Follow-up clinical and duplex examinations were performed at 4 days, 4 weeks, and 4 months after saphenous vein radiofrequency ablation and at ≥6 months thereafter. Venous clinical severity scoring was repeated at follow-up visits, and patients were asked to evaluate their level of satisfaction with the procedure.

Results

The mean ± standard deviation age of the patients was 53.5 ± 13.3 years (range, 28 to 86 years), and 68% were women. Pretreatment CEAP clinical class C3/C4 comprised 80% of limbs (520/682). Preoperative, 4-day, 4-week, and 4-month venous clinical severity scores were, respectively, 8.8 ± 3.7 in 648 limbs, 5.2 ± 3.0 in 629, 4.1 ± 2.4 in 530, and 3.3 ± 1.6 in 479 limbs. Saphenous vein radiofrequency ablation significantly reduced pain related to lower extremity venous disease from 95.7% to 15.2% (P < .0001) and edema from 92.4% to 17.0% (P < .0001). Before treatment, venous stasis ulcers were present in 52 limbs and healed at a rate of 86%. Complications in 633 limbs at last follow-up included superficial thrombophlebitis in 12.0%, paresthesia in 0.3%, and nonocclusive thrombus extension in 0.2%. No skin thermal injury was observed. Fewer than 2% of patients reported dissatisfaction with their procedural outcome. Age (relative risk, 0.98; P = .06), female sex (relative risk, 0.19; P < .0001), and tumescent volume >250 mL (relative risk, 0.59; P = .06) were associated with higher rates of occlusion. The overall occlusion rate was 87.1%.

Conclusions

As determined by the venous clinical severity score, treatment of saphenous vein reflux with endovenous radiofrequency ablation results in the clinical improvement of symptoms and aids in the healing of venous ulcers. Age, female sex, and tumescent volume are associated with high success rates of occlusion. We found the venous clinical severity score to be an excellent stand-alone tool for assessing outcomes after saphenous vein radiofrequency ablation.

 

 Competition of interest: none.

 Additional material for this article may be found online at www.jvascsurg.org.

PII: S0741-5214(07)00011-0

doi:10.1016/j.jvs.2006.12.061

Journal of Vascular Surgery
Volume 45, Issue 5 , Pages 1008-1015.e2, May 2007