BACKGROUND: Telangiectasias have been treated with sclerotherapy without concomitant assessment or treatment of saphenous veins. OBJECTIVE: To clarify if ultrasound (US) mapping of saphenous veins is justifiable, this investigation determined prevalence of specific patterns of saphenous vein reflux in women with telangiectasias. METHODS: US mapping of the great and small saphenous veins (GSV, SSV) was performed in 1,740 extremities of 910 consecutive patients, mostly women (86%). A subgroup of 269 limbs of women with telangiectasias (CEAP C1 class) was included in this study. Patterns of GSV and SSV reflux were classified as perijunctional, proximal, distal, segmental, multisegmental, and diffuse. RESULTS: Reflux was detected in 125 extremities (46%): 5% had reflux in both the GSV and the SSV, 39% had GSV reflux, and 2% had SSV reflux. The most common pattern of GSV reflux was segmental (73%, 87/119). Prevalence of reflux was significantly greater in GSV versus SSV (p < .001). GSV segmental plus distal reflux (40%, 108/269) was significantly more prevalent than saphenofemoral junction or near junction reflux (4%, 11/269; p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: US mapping of the GSV in women with telangiectasias is justifiable, even in asymptomatic extremities. Further research will determine if segmental reflux should be treated to avoid evolution to severe valvular insufficiency.
BACKGROUND:Telangiectasias have been treated with sclerotherapy without concomitant assessment or treatment of saphenous veins. OBJECTIVE: To clarify if ultrasound (US) mapping of saphenous veins is justifiable, this investigation determined prevalence of specific patterns of saphenous vein reflux in women with telangiectasias. METHODS: US mapping of the great and small saphenous veins (GSV, SSV) was performed in 1,740 extremities of 910 consecutive patients, mostly women (86%). A subgroup of 269 limbs of women with telangiectasias (CEAP C1 class) was included in this study. Patterns of GSV and SSV reflux were classified as perijunctional, proximal, distal, segmental, multisegmental, and diffuse. RESULTS: Reflux was detected in 125 extremities (46%): 5% had reflux in both the GSV and the SSV, 39% had GSV reflux, and 2% had SSV reflux. The most common pattern of GSV reflux was segmental (73%, 87/119). Prevalence of reflux was significantly greater in GSV versus SSV (p < .001). GSV segmental plus distal reflux (40%, 108/269) was significantly more prevalent than saphenofemoral junction or near junction reflux (4%, 11/269; p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: US mapping of the GSV in women with telangiectasias is justifiable, even in asymptomatic extremities. Further research will determine if segmental reflux should be treated to avoid evolution to severe valvular insufficiency.