Details

Autor(en) / Beteiligte

• Obi, Andrea T., MD
• Sutzko, Danielle C., MD, MS
• Almeida, Jose I., MD
• Kabnick, Lowell, MD
• Cronenwett, Jack L., MD
• Osborne, Nicholas H., MD, MS
• Lal, Brajesh K., MD
• Wakefield, Thomas W., MD

Titel

First 10-month results of the Vascular Quality Initiative Varicose Vein Registry

Ist Teil von

• Journal of vascular surgery. Venous and lymphatic disorders (New York, NY), 2017-05, Vol.5 (3), p.312-320.e2

Ort / Verlag

United States: Elsevier Inc

Erscheinungsjahr

2017

Link zum Volltext

Quelle

MEDLINE

Beschreibungen/Notizen

• Abstract Objective The Vascular Quality Initiative Varicose Vein Registry (VQI VVR) represents a new Patient Safety Organization database launched in January 2015 as a collaborative effort between the American Venous Forum and the Society for Vascular Surgery. This study was undertaken to identify real-world trends among treatment choices and outcomes of varicose vein patients. Methods Registry data prospectively captured anatomic, procedural, and outcome data for patients with C2 or more severe disease undergoing intervention for venous varicosities from January to November 2015. Univariate descriptive statistics of demographic and procedural data was performed. Preprocedural and postprocedural comparisons were performed with t -test or χ2 analysis as appropriate. Results In total, 2661 veins in 1803 limbs of 1406 patients were treated for varicose vein disease. The majority of patients were female (71.5%) and white (78.3%). Previous varicose vein treatment had been undertaken by 31.2%. The most common site of reflux was the great saphenous vein in 74.4%, with 31% of patients having coexisting deep venous reflux. The right and left extremities were affected equally. Endovenous treatment of axial reflux was the preferred treatment in 89.1%, divided largely between radiofrequency ablation (55.2%) and endovenous laser ablation (33.9%). Clusters were often treated concomitantly with truncal reflux (n = 488 [76%]). The majority of cluster treatments were performed in an office-based setting (78.1%). The majority of clusters were located at the calf (89.7%) and treated with stab phlebectomy (84.8%). For all patients undergoing intervention for varicose veins, Venous Clinical Severity Score (VCSS) improved on average 4.68 ± 3.35 (n = 719; P  < .001) postoperatively from a mean preoperative VCSS of 9.39 ± 3.87 to a mean postoperative VCSS of 4.71 ± 3.83. Improvements were seen in patient-reported outcomes (PROs) of heaviness, achiness, throbbing, swelling, itching, appearance, and work impact (total score change, 10.75 ± 6.94; n = 607; P  < .001) from a mean preoperative PRO score of 16.48 ± 6.23 to a mean postoperative PRO score of 5.73 ± 5.80. Conclusions The VQI VVR provides detailed assessment of varicose vein interventions and is useful for monitoring of changes after treatment. Modern-day varicose vein surgery is characterized by predominantly endovenous treatment of axial vein reflux, phlebectomy of clusters, and substantial improvements in both VCSS and PROs.