Abstract:Objective: Endovenous therapies are currently the standard of care for the treatment of patients with symptomatic great saphenous vein (GSV) reflux. The effectiveness and long-term outcomes of these therapies for anterior accessory great saphenous veins (AAGSVs) are poorly defined. The objective of this investigation is to determine treatment outcomes in patients with symptomatic AAGSV reflux compared with patients with symptomatic GSV reflux. Methods: Data were prospectively collected in the Center for Vein Restoration's electronic medical record system (NexGen Healthcare Information System, Irvine, Calif) and retrospectively analyzed. Treatment outcomes after a standalone ablation and ablation + phlebectomy were compared in patients with isolated AAGSV and GSV reflux. Treatment outcomes were assessed at 1 month and 6 months postprocedure using the revised Venous Clinical Severity Score (rVCSS) and the 20-item Chronic Venous Insufficiency Quality-of-Life Questionnaire (CIVIQ20) survey for quality of life. Medical and surgical comorbidities, Clinical-Etiological-Anatomical-Pathophysiological classification, body mass index, gender, race, and the average number of procedures performed were all analyzed. Results: From January 2015 to December 2018, 31,186 patients and 49,193 limbs were assessed. Of these, 91 patients/103 limbs had isolated AAGSV reflux, and 7704 patients/10,371 limbs had isolated GSV reflux. There were 95% and 75% women in the isolated AAGSV and GSV groups, respectively (P ≤ .001). For the ablation-only patients, AAGSV (n = 57 patients/61 limbs) and GSV (n = 5349 patients/7191 limbs), there were no differences in preintervention (7.0 ± 2.0 vs 6.8 ± 2.8, P = .99), 1-month (4.0 ± 2.4 vs 3.9 ± 2.8, P = .99), and 6-month (3.9 ± 2.6 vs 3.9 ± 2.9, P = .55) rVCSS scores. Similar results were observed when ablations and phlebectomies were performed (AAGSV [n = 34 patients/42 limbs] and GSV [n = 1848 patients/2491 limbs]). CIVIQ20 scores for patients with isolated AAGSV and GSV were 53.3 ± 19.6 vs 50.6 ± 18.8 (P = .43) preintervention, 37.2 ± 17.6 vs 35.7 ± 15.9 (P = .91) at 1 month, and 41.3 ± 21.7 vs 35.1 ± 15.7 (P = .36) at 6 months, respectively. Postprocedure scores within groups improved at 1 and 6 months (P ≤ .02); however, 6-month AAGSV CIVIQ20 scores after an ablation increased slightly compared with 1-month scores and were not different to preintervention GSV scores (P = .07). When phlebectomies were performed with ablations, 6-month CIVIQ20 scores were similar between groups (P = .72). There was no difference in the average number of ablations in patients with phlebectomies in the AAGSV or GSV group (1.24 ± 0.44 vs 1.35 ± 0.49, P = .15). Conclusions: Endovenous therapies for the treatment of symptomatic AAGSVs demonstrate similar outcomes to patients with symptomatic GSV reflux. For standalone ablations, the rVCSS scores are similar between the groups; however, CIVIQ20 scores increase to preintervention levels in standalone ablation AAGSV patients at 6 months. This increase disappears when phlebectomies are performed with ablations. Based on these data, patients with symptomatic AAGSV treated with ablation also require treatment of the associated tributaries (varicosities) to achieve similar outcomes to patients with GSV, and this calls into question the effectiveness of ablation for isolated AAGSV reflux.

Clinical outcomes after treatment of incompetent saphenous vein combined with segmental popliteal vein reflux

Reappraisal of muscular loop substitute valve of popliteal vein in the treatment of reflux venous disorders of the lower extremities

Severity of disease and treatment outcomes of anterior accessory great saphenous veins compared with the great saphenous vein

Stenting of the venous outflow in chronic venous disease: long-term stent-related outcome, clinical, and hemodynamic result

Treatment extent of femoropopliteal disease and clinical outcomes following endovascular therapy

Long-term outcomes of mechanochemical ablation using the Clarivein device for the treatment of great saphenous vein incompetence

Venous stenting versus venous ablation

Short Term Cost Effectiveness of Radiofrequency Ablation and High Ligation/Stripping for Great Saphenous Vein Incompetence

Clinical outcomes of nonthermal ablation, thermal ablation, and surgical stripping for varicose veins

Clinical Results 5 Years after Great Saphenous Vein Stripping

Endovascular treatment of chronic ilio-femoral vein obstruction with extension below the inguinal ligament in patients with post-thrombotic syndrome.

Interventions for great saphenous vein insufficiency: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

Technical details and clinical outcomes of transpopliteal venous stent placement for postthrombotic chronic total occlusion of the iliofemoral vein

Comparison of day surgery between varicose veins with and without superficial venous thrombosis below knee: a propensity score-matched analysis

A practice audit of short-term outcomes of Wallstents versus Venovo stents for the treatment of nonthrombotic iliac vein outflow stenoses

Midterm Results of Endovascular Treatment for Iliac Vein Compression Syndrome from a Single Center

Combination of Minimally Invasive Methods for the Treatment of Varicose Veins

Intravascular Ultrasound Use is Associated with Improved Patency in Lower Extremity Peripheral Arterial Interventions

Saphenous vein sparing surgery: principles, techniques and results

Impact of great saphenous vein ablation on healing and recurrence of venous leg ulcers in patients with post-thrombotic syndrome: a retrospective comparative study

Pivotal Study Evaluating the Safety and Effectiveness of the Abre Venous Self-Expanding Stent System in Patients With Symptomatic Iliofemoral Venous Outflow Obstruction