Literature DB >> 23084734

Chronic venous ulcer: minimally invasive treatment of superficial axial and perforator vein reflux speeds healing and reduces recurrence.

Peter B Alden1, Erin M Lips, Kate P Zimmerman, Ross F Garberich, Adnan Z Rizvi, Alexander S Tretinyak, Jason Q Alexander, Kathryn M Dorr, Mark Hutchinson, Sarah L Isakson.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Chronic venous ulcer (CVU) is common and is responsible for significant health care expenditures worldwide. Compression is the mainstay of treatment, but long-term compliance with this therapy is often inconsistent, particularly in the elderly and infirm. Surgical ablation of axial and perforator reflux has been used as an adjunct to compression to reduce recurrence rates and assist healing. These surgical techniques are being replaced by minimally invasive procedures, such as thermal ablation and foam sclerotherapy, in the treatment of uncomplicated venous disease. The role for these techniques in the treatment of CVU is just beginning to be defined.
METHODS: Eighty-six patients with CVU with 95 active ulcers (Clinical, Etiology, Anatomy, Physiology-CEAP clinical class 6) presenting to a multispecialty wound clinic were retrospectively reviewed and analyzed by leg. All patients underwent duplex scanning for venous insufficiency. Ulcer dimensions at each visit were recorded and used to calculate healing rates. Presence or absence of ulcer recurrence at 1-year follow-up was recorded. Ulcers treated with compression alone ("compression group") were compared with those treated with compression and minimally invasive interventions, such as thermal ablation of superficial axial reflux and ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy (UGFS) of incompetent perforating veins and varicosities ("intervention group").
RESULTS: The average age in the intervention and compression groups was 67 and 71 years, respectively (P = not significant [NS]). Body mass index was 32.4 ± 9.5 and 33.6 ± 11.8 kg/m(2), in the compression and intervention groups, respectively (P = not significant [NS]). Ulcers were recurrent in 42% of the intervention group and 26% of the compression group (P = NS). In the intervention group, 33% had radiofrequency ablation of axial reflux, 31% had UGFS of perforators, and 29% had both treatments. The only complication of intervention was a single case of cellulitis requiring hospitalization. Compared with the compression group, the ulcers in the intervention group healed faster (9.7% vs. 4.2% per week; P = 0.001) and showed fewer recurrences at 1-year follow-up (27.1% vs. 48.9 %; P < 0.015). Multivariate analysis showed use of intervention was the strongest determinant of healing with a coefficient of variation of 7.432, SE 2.406, P = 0.003. Analysis of just the intervention group before and after intervention using matched pairs showed acceleration of healing after intervention from ranging from a median of 1.2% (interquartile range [IQR], 14.3) to 9.7% (IQR, 11.3) per week (P ≤ 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Minimally invasive ablation of superficial axial and perforator vein reflux in patients with active CVU is safe and leads to faster healing and decreased ulcer recurrence when combined with compression alone in the treatment of CVU.
Copyright © 2013 Annals of Vascular Surgery Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23084734     DOI: 10.1016/j.avsg.2012.06.002

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Vasc Surg        ISSN: 0890-5096            Impact factor:   1.466


  9 in total

1.  Effects of a new nutraceutical substance on clinical and molecular parameters in patients with chronic venous ulceration.

Authors:  Raffaele Serra; Raffaele Grande; Lucia Butrico; Gianluca Buffone; Francesco G Caliò; Aida Squillace; Barbara A Rizzo; Mafalda Massara; Francesco Spinelli; Alessia G Ferrarese; Giovanni de Caridi; Luca Gallelli; Stefano de Franciscis
Journal:  Int Wound J       Date:  2014-02-25       Impact factor: 3.315

2.  [Leg ulcers].

Authors:  U Wollina; L Unger; C Stelzner; J Machetanz; S Schellong
Journal:  Internist (Berl)       Date:  2013-11       Impact factor: 0.743

Review 3.  Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Points for the Management of Venous Ulcers.

Authors:  Ravul Jindal; D B Dekiwadia; Pinjala Rama Krishna; Ajay K Khanna; Malay D Patel; Shoaib Padaria; Roy Varghese
Journal:  Indian J Surg       Date:  2018-01-27       Impact factor: 0.656

Review 4.  Minimally invasive treatments for perforator vein insufficiency.

Authors:  Gokhan Kuyumcu; Gloria Maria Salazar; Anand M Prabhakar; Suvranu Ganguli
Journal:  Cardiovasc Diagn Ther       Date:  2016-12

5.  Axial ablation versus terminal interruption of the reflux source (AAVTIRS): a randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  C R Keohane; D Westby; M Twyford; T Ahern; W Tawfick; S R Walsh
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2022-06-10       Impact factor: 2.728

Review 6.  A treatment algorithm to identify therapeutic approaches for leg ulcers in patients with sickle cell disease.

Authors:  Igor A Altman; Raymond E Kleinfelder; John G Quigley; William J Ennis; Caterina P Minniti
Journal:  Int Wound J       Date:  2015-11-04       Impact factor: 3.315

7.  Ultrasound-guided cyanoacrylate injection for the treatment of incompetent perforator veins.

Authors:  Alexa Mordhorst; Gary K Yang; Jerry C Chen; Shung Lee; Joel Gagnon
Journal:  Phlebology       Date:  2021-05-27       Impact factor: 1.701

8.  A new option for endovascular treatment of leg ulcers caused by venous insufficiency with fluoroscopically guided sclerotherapy.

Authors:  Jerzy Garcarek; Aleksander Falkowski; Zbigniew Rybak; Tomasz Jargiello; Marek Łokaj; Norbert Czapla; Magdalena Sroczyk-Jaszczyńska
Journal:  Wideochir Inne Tech Maloinwazyjne       Date:  2015-09-14       Impact factor: 1.195

9.  A retrospective cohort study comparing two treatments for active venous leg ulcers.

Authors:  Xiaochun Liu; Guofu Zheng; Bo Ye; Weiqing Chen; Hailiang Xie; Teng Zhang; Jing Lin
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2020-02       Impact factor: 1.817

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.