PC182. the Screen Value of Lower Extremity Ascending Venography on Patients with Nonthrombotic Iliac Vein Compression Lesions

Xinrui Yang,Xinwu Lu,Kaichuang Ye,Minyi Yin
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvs.2016.03.350
IF: 4.86
2016-01-01
Journal of Vascular Surgery
Abstract:Computed tomography venography (CTV)/magnetic resonance venography (MRV) is the most common method to detect nonthrombotic iliac vein compression lesion (NIVCL) by far. However, without hemodynamic assessment, the diagnostic standard with stenosis >50% of the iliac vein makes it overdiagnosed and overtreated. This study aims to evaluate the clinical value of lower extremity ascending venography (LEAV) on screening NIVCL. From January 2014 to June 2015, patients with symptoms of chronic venous diseases accepted CTV/MRV examinations in Department of Vascular Surgery in Shanghai 9th People's Hospital. According to CTV/MRV results, patients with a lesion with >50% stenosis in the iliac vein, even without involving branches in the pelvis; or < 50% stenosis in the iliac vein with pelvic collaterals received LEAV and transfemoral venography (TFV) in the interventional angiography suite. We recorded the image information according to LEAV and TFV. The sign of compression only: stenosis or filling defect of the iliac vein without any branch (±); ipsilateral internal iliac vein (+); median sacral vein, and/or ascending lumbar vein (++); multiple cross pelvic collaterals (+++) (Fig 1). We evaluated the sensitivity and specificity of LEAV on detecting hemodynamic significance (signs with branches in the pelvis) with ROC curve. Then we compared the inter-rater reliability between LEAV and TFV, using symmetric measures with κ coefficient. A total of 55 patients (35 women) with suspected NIVCL enrolled in this study. The average age was 55.7 years (range, 27-68 years). The clinical manifestations could be graded as C2 in 7 (12.7%), C3 in 24 (43.6%), C4 in 8 (14.5%), C5 in 10 (18.2%), and C6 in 6 (10.9%). There were 26 patients (47.3%) who presented with venous claudication. LEAV and TFV were both performed. The results are presented in the Table. Taking TFV as gold standard, the sensitivity of LEAV to reveal the hemodynamic significance was 95.7% and specificity was 62.5%. The total consistent rate was 90.9%. The area under ROC curve was 0.826 (P = .006 <.005, which showed a moderate accuracy of LEAV. The symmetric measure with ranked data showed a moderate agreement of inter-rater reliability between LEAV and TFV (κ = 0.479; P < .001). LEAV has high sensitivity and moderate accuracy on detecting hemodynamic significance. Compared to TFV, LEAV has moderate reliability. It is a simple method to reveal not only compression but also the presence of flow reversal in the ipsilateral internal iliac vein, median sacral vein, enlarged ascending lumbar vein, and multiple cross pelvic collaterals, which is a sign of hemodynamic significance. It may be considered as a screening method for NIVCL.TableThe results of lower extremity ascending venography (LEAV) and transfemoral venography (TFV)TFVLEAV±++++++Total, No. (%)±52007 (12.7)+34007 (12.7)++02406 (10.9)+++0842335 (63.6)Total, No. (%)8 (14.5)16 (29.1)8 (14.5)23 (41.8)55 (100) Open table in a new tab
What problem does this paper attempt to address?