Selective crossectomy combined with mechanochemical ablation in the treatment of great saphenous vein insufficiency: Early results of a single center experience

Author:

Petrone Anna1,Peluso Antonio1,Ammollo Raffaele P1,Turchino Davide1,del Guercio Luca1,Andreucci Michele2,Serra Raffaele34ORCID,Bracale Umberto M1

Affiliation:

1. Department of Public Health, Vascular Surgery Unit, University Federico II of Naples, Naples, Italy

2. Department of Health Sciences, University Magna Graecia of Catanzaro, Catanzaro, Italy

3. Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences, University Magna Graecia of Catanzaro, Catanzaro, Italy

4. Interuniversity Center of Phlebolymphology (CIFL). International Research and Educational Program in Clinical and Experimental Biotechnology. Headquarters: University Magna Græcia of Catanzaro, Catanzaro, Italy

Abstract

Background Selective crossectomy and mechanochemical ablation (MOCA) of great saphenous vein (GSV) have been used, for years, individually in the treatment of chronic venous insufficiency. In this paper, we focus on the advantages of a combination of the two techniques, in order to prevent complications and recurrence. Methods A preoperative clinical and instrumental screening phase was conducted for the purpose of dividing patients into three groups: “Saph+Cross” group (51/139 patients) underwent saphenectomy and crossectomy; “MOCA” group (44/139 patients) underwent MOCA of GSV with Flebogrif® device; “MOCA + Cross” group (44/139 patients) subjected to both MOCA and crossectomy procedures. Recurrence rate, defined as total recanalization of GSV and/or onset of neosaphena and/or new varicose veins, was used as a primary outcome. Secondary outcomes were procedural time and intra- and post-procedural complications. Results We conducted a 1-, 6-, and 12-month follow-up with Duplex scan. The recurrence rates were 3.9%, 21.8%, and 4.5% for “Saph+Cross,” “MOCA,” and “MOCA+Cross,” respectively, with a significant difference for the comparison between “MOCA” and “Saph+Cross” (MOCA vs Saph+Cross: OR 5.35, CI95% [0.98; 54.6], p-value .040). The sub-analysis of primary outcome highlighted a lower recanalization rate of GSV when combining the crossectomy with MOCA procedure (2.2% MOCA+Cross vs 15.9% MOCA; 0.12 OR, [0.002; 1.02] CI95%, p-value .029). Among the secondary outcomes, “MOCA” showed a shorter procedural time than the other groups (Saph+Cross: 51.3 ± 11.4; MOCA: 45.1 ± 7.5; MOCA+Cross: 50.4 ± 10; p-value .027). No significant differences were noted in terms of intra- and post-procedural complications. Conclusions The results showed that patients treated with saphenectomy and crossectomy have a lower recurrence rate compared to MOCA alone and MOCA + crossectomy procedures. The association of crossectomy with MOCA significantly reduces the recanalization rate of GSV, and it is also characterized by a higher free survival from recurrence (SSF) than with MOCA alone.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine,General Medicine

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3