Meta-analysis of subfascial endoscopic perforator vein surgery (SEPS) for chronic venous insufficiency

Abstract

Objectives The degree of benefits and risks, and the role of subfascial endoscopic perforator vein surgery (SEPS) in the management for chronic venous insufficiency (CVI) remains uncertain. Methods A multiple health database search was performed including Medline, Embase, Ovid, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Cochrane Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness, on all studies published between 1985 and 2008 that reported on health outcomes in patients with CVI treated with SEPS and comparing this therapy with the conventional Linton procedure. Three studies, which compared SEPS with conventional surgery, were included in the present meta-analysis. Results Between SEPS and Linton groups, there was a significant lower rate of wound infections for SEPS (odds ratio [OR] 0.06 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.02 to 0.25]) and a significantly reduced hospital stay for SEPS (OR –8.96 [95% CI –11.62 to –6.30]). In addition, SEPS was associated with a significant reduced rate of recurrent ulcers (mean follow-up 21 months) (OR 0.15 [95% CI 0.04–0.62]). There was no significant difference between the groups in the following dimensions: rate of hospital re-admission (OR 0.21 [95% CI 0.03 –1.31]), death at six months (OR 3.00 [95% CI 0.11–78.27]), ulcer healing rate at four months (OR 0.44 [95% CI 0.09–2.12]), and the rate of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) (OR 0.35 [95% CI 0.01–8.85]). Conclusion From the level of evidence available by now it seems that SEPS, used as a part of a treatment regimen for severe CVI, benefits most patients in the short term regarding ulcer healing and the prevention of ulcer recurrence. It can be safely performed with less early postoperative complications compared with the Linton procedure. However, further prospective randomized trials are required to define the long-term benefits of SEPS.