Search

The article discusses the indications and safe volumes for sclerotherapy in the treatment of chronic venous disease, emphasizing the need for careful patient selection and tailored treatment approaches. Topics include contraindications for sclerotherapy, diagnostic evaluation using duplex ultrasound, and recommendations for sclerosant type and concentration based on target vessel characteristics.

Background: This study aimed to discuss common complications of medical aesthetic treatments, which require ophthalmological intervention. Methods: This literature study evaluated published journal articles (clinical trials or scientific reviews) that were extracted from electronic databases (MEDLINE and PubMed) and reference lists of related articles. Only articles available in English were considered for this review. Results: Unskillful interference in the eye area can cause severe, irreversible complications, including blindness. This is a constant risk because of anatomical deviations, and retrograde blood flow. Conclusions: Accurate knowledge of anatomy, especially the vascular anatomy of high-risk sites, and the understanding of the depth and plane of injection, and various injection techniques minimize the risk of these complications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Great saphenous reflux is widely managed by endovenous methods as first line treatment. Sclerotherapy is a recommendation when other endovenous treatments are not. Ultrasound-guided catheter-directed foam sclerotherapy appears to be attractive and suitable. Tumescent anesthesia is used in other endovenous thermal treatments to help with vein compression around the catheter for better contact and prevent heat damage. In developing countries like Thailand, the costs of the standardized instruments such as radiofrequency ablation or endovenous laser are costly. Not many patients can afford such treatments alternative of a minimally invasive treatment in truncal vein reflux. But it is inferior in terms of closure rate. Objective: In general, foam sclerotherapy has an closure rate of only about 70% in 3 years. The compressive effect of tumescent anesthesia can be applied to help increase the effectiveness of sclerotherapy as it can compress the vein and empty the blood. Therefore, better contact of the sclerosant to the vein wall and the concentration of the sclerosant is not dissipated by the blood. Perivenous tumescent injection together with ultrasound-guided catheter-directed foam sclerotherapy was proposed. Reviewed literature showed lower costs and acceptable satisfaction. Materials and Methods: Randomization of 31 patients with 38 treated legs in total. 16 patients with 20 treated legs were enrolled in the tumescent group and 15 patients with 18 treated legs in the non-tumescent group. 1% aethoxysklerol was used as sclerosant. Tumescent solution was comprised of 1% xylocaine, ketorolac, 0.9% NSS, and dexamethasone. Patients were treated as ambulatory cases with light sedation in the operating room. Patients were followed-up at 2-week, 1-month, 3-month and 6-month intervals with duplex ultrasonography performed by vascular fellows. Primary outcome was closure rates between the two groups. Secondary outcomes were VCSS, incidence of DVT or symptomatic PE, any other adverse events and satisfaction score. Results: Both groups were not statistically significant in terms of occlusion rate by the Kaplan-Meier curve (p = 0.891). Occlusion rates at 90 days were 93.75% in the tumescent group and 100% in the non-tumescent group, at 150 days were 81.2% in the tumescent group and 78.1% in the non-tumescent group. DVT or PE 0%. Adverse events were ecchymosis in two patients and cord like tenderness in one. Mean satisfaction score at last follow-up was 4 out of 5. Reduction in the VCSS at the end of follow-up period compared to pre-operatively was not statistically different between the two groups. Conclusion: Perivenous tumescent enhanced ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy solution did not demonstrate improvement in occlusion rate. But it could be performed as an outpatient setting with no major adverse events. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Tufted angioma is a rare vascular tumor with cutaneous angiomatous proliferation, commonly localized in the skin and subcutaneous tissues. Most cases are usually acquired in childhood, having protracted course with minimal tendency for spontaneous regression. Various treatment modalities have been described in the literature in the management of tufted angioma with variable response. Thus, there is an urge for simple yet effective and less invasive procedure for tufted angioma, particularly involving aesthetically important areas such as face, head, and neck. We report a case of a large tufted angioma over the neck of a young girl, successfully treated with a combined approach of oral propranolol and foam sclerotherapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective This retrospective study presents the long-term results of catheter-directed foam sclerotherapy of the great saphenous vein. Method From January 2003 to June 2017, 277 patients with varices and great saphenous vein incompetence were treated with echo-guided foam sclerotherapy. Forty-six patients were treated with long-catheters guided by foam sclerotherapy. Foaming was carried out with sodium-tetra-decyl-sulphate. Results Results were examined in the two groups: A (long-catheters) and B (other procedures). The median overall follow-up was 52.1 months. In the A-group, the complete occlusion rate was 34/46 pts (73.9%) and partial occlusion was 10/46 (21.7%). In the B-group, respectively, 130/231 (56.2%) and 90/231 (38.9%). Comparisons between groups were statistically significant (p = 0.023; p = 0.021). Failures involved, respectively, 2/46 (4.3%) and 11/231 (4.7%) with no statistical significance. The complication rates were similar in the two groups. Conclusions In this long-term experience (median follow-up exceeding four years), foam-guided sclerotherapy of the great saphenous vein with a long-catheter turned out to be more effective than the usual foam-guided sclerotherapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Scope Varithena® is a recently approved commercially available drug/delivery unit that produces foam using 1% polidocanol for the management of varicose veins. The purpose of this review is to examine the benefits of foam sclerotherapy, features of the ideal foam sclerosant and the strengths and limitations of Varithena® in the context of current foam sclerotherapy practices. Method Electronic databases including PubMed, Medline (Ovid) SP as well as trial registries and product information sheets were searched using the keywords, ‘Varithena’, ‘Varisolve’, ‘polidocanol endovenous microfoam’, ‘polidocanol’ and/or ‘foam sclerotherapy/sclerosant’. Articles published prior to 20 September 2016 were identified. Results Foam sclerosants have effectively replaced liquid agents due to their physiochemical properties resulting in better clinical outcomes. Medical practitioners commonly prepare sclerosant foam at the bedside by agitating liquid sclerosant with a gas such as room air, using techniques as described by Tessari or the double syringe method. Such physician-compounded foams are highly operator dependent producing inconsistent foams of different gas/liquid compositions, bubble size, foam behaviour and varied safety profiles. Varithena® overcomes the variability and inconsistencies of physician-compounded foam. However, Varithena® has limited applications due to its fixed sclerosant type and concentration, cost and lack of worldwide availability. Clinical trials of Varithena® have demonstrated efficacy and safety outcomes equivalent or better than physician-compounded foam but only in comparison to placebo alone. Conclusion Varithena® is a promising step towards the creation of an ideal sclerosant foam. Further assessment in independent randomised controlled clinical trials is required to establish the advantages of Varithena® over and above the current best practice physician-compounded foam. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives The objectives were to examine the density, bubble size distribution and durability of sodium tetradecyl sulphate foam and the consistency of production of foam by a number of different operators using the Tessari method. Methods 1% and 3% sodium tetradecyl sulphate sclerosant foam was produced by an experienced operator and a group of inexperienced operators using either a 1:3 or 1:4 liquid:air ratio and the Tessari method. The foam density, bubble size distribution and foam durability were measured on freshly prepared foam from each operator. Results The foam density measurements were similar for each of the 1:3 preparations and for each of the 1:4 preparations but not affected by the sclerosant concentration. The bubble size for all preparations were very small immediately after preparation but progressively coalesced to become a micro-foam (<250 µm) after the first 30 s up until 2 min. Both the 1% and 3% solution foams developed liquid more rapidly when made in a 1:3 ratio (37 s) than in a 1:4 ratio (45 s) but all combinations took similar times to reach 0.4 ml liquid formation. For all the experiments, there was no statistical significant difference between operators. Conclusions The Tessari method of foam production for sodium tetradecyl sulphate sclerosant is consistent and reproducible even when made by inexperienced operators. The best quality foam with micro bubbles should be used within the first minute after production. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives An aging population requires evaluation of methods of treatment for older patients. Our objective was to evaluate the indications, practical modalities, safety and tolerability of sclerotherapy in patients 75 years of age and older (group 1) and compare with a control group of patients 18 to74 years of age (group 2). Method This observational, multicentre, prospective and comparative study was conducted by the French Society of Phlebology. Each centre collected in 10 to 20 patients ≥75 years of age and an equal number of patients <75 years of age treated by sclerotherapy, the treatment indication, the patient's personal history, the CEAP clinical class, the type of the veins being treated, the characteristics of sclerotherapy and the complications (immediately after treatment and at one-month follow-up).Results Population: In total, 418 patients were enrolled in 15 centres: 176 patients in group 1 (mean: 79.4 years) and 242 patients in group 2 (mean: 52.7 years).CEAP clinical classes C4, C5 and C6, history of deep vein thrombosis (12.5%) and superficial vein thrombosis (11.9%), long-term anticoagulant therapy (9.1%) and antiplatelet therapy (16.5%) were more frequent in older patients.All types of veins were treated from saphenous veins to telangiectasias. Sclerotherapy features: There was no difference in concentration of the sclerosing agents. When foam sclerotherapy was used (84% of patients), the injected volume was lower in group 1. Complications: One vasovagal syncope occurred in group 1. One asymptomatic distal deep vein thrombosis, confined to the Medial Gastrocnemius Veins, was reported in both groups at one-month follow-up. Conclusions This study shows the feasibility and safety of sclerotherapy in older patients, with no specific complications nor need for special precautions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives There is insufficient evidence to inform guidelines on the optimal compression strategy following ablation for varicose veins. This study aimed to identify the practice of key opinion leaders performing randomised clinical trials involving endovenous ablation. Method A systematic review of MEDLINE/EMBASE/CENTRAL was performed identifying the compression strategies used in randomised clinical trials where at least one comparator arm underwent endovenous ablation. Results Thirty-four randomised clinical trials were identified. At least 14 different compression products were used, with at least 6 different pressures in 7 different regimes with durations from 2 to 84 days. There was no evidence of any convergence of practice over time. Conclusions A lack of evidence as to the optimal strategy for compression has resulted in a marked variation in clinical practice. There is no suggestion that this variation is becoming less over time indicating that experience is not helping to form a consensus and, therefore, further research is required. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective Although varicose veins are a common cause of morbidity, the UK National Health Service and private medical insurers have previously sought to ration their treatment in a non-evidence based manner in order to limit health-care expenditure and reimbursement. In July 2013, the UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence published new national Clinical Guidelines (CG168) to promote evidence-based commissioning and management of varicose veins. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of CG168 on the referral and management of varicose veins at the Heart of England NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, UK. Methods Interrogation of a prospectively gathered database, provided by the Heart of England NHS Foundation Trust Performance Unit, of patients undergoing interventions for varicose veins since 1 January 2012. Patients treated before (group 1) and after (group 2) publication of CG168 were compared. Results There were 253 patients, 286 legs (48% male, mean (range) age 54 (20–91) years) treated in group 1, and 417 patients, 452 legs, (46% male, mean (range) age 54 (14–90) years) treated in group 2, an increase of 65%. CG168 was associated with a significant reduction in the use of surgery (131 patients (52%) group 1 vs. 127 patients (30%) group 2, p = 0.0003, χ2), no change in endothermal ablation (30 patients (12%) group 1 vs. 45 patients (11%) group 2), a significant increase in ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy (92 patients (36%) group 1 and 245 patients (59%) group 2, p = 0.0001, χ2) and an increase in treatment for C2/3 disease (53% group 1 and 65.2% group 2, p = 0.0022, χ2). Conclusions Publication of National Institute for Health and Care Excellence CG168 has been associated with a significant increase (65%) in the number of patients treated, referral at an earlier (CEAP C) stage and increased use of endovenous treatment. CG 168 has been highly effective in improving access to, and quality of care, for varicose veins at Heart of England NHS Foundation Trust. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy (UGFS) of varicose veins is a useful treatment option. It is a relatively safe method in the case of limited, small varicose veins. In theory, a justified concern could be raised that the injection of an active drug into the large superficial venous vessels may potentially cause life-threatening consequences. Aim: To assess the safety and efficacy of UGFS using a 2% solution of polidocanol (Aethoxysklerol 2%) in the case of great saphenous vein incompetence. Material and methods: Fifty-two patients with great saphenous vein incompetence underwent ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy. The efficacy criterion was the elimination of reflux measured ultrasonographically and withdrawal or decrease of complaints: 1 week, and 1, 3, 6 and 12 months after the treatment. Complications of sclerotherapy were reported during follow-up. Results: Decrease or withdrawal of complaints of chronic venous insufficiency was reported in 96% of cases (50 patients). Disappearance or decrease of varicose veins was noted in all patients (100%). During examination after 12 months, full success of ultrasound was achieved in 38 (73%) cases, and 11 (21%) patients presented a partial desired effect according to the consensus from Tegernsee. Persistence of reflux longer than 1 s in the treated great saphenous vein was reported in 3 (6%) cases. Serious complications, such as deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, dyspnea, anaphylaxis, or neurological abnormalities, were not recorded. Conclusions: Ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy of incompetent great saphenous vein and varicosities with 2% polidocanol was found to be an effective and safe method of treatment during 1 year of observation. However, longer observation is necessary. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective The last 10 years have seen the introduction into everyday clinical practice of a wide range of novel non-surgical treatments for varicose veins. In July 2013, the UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence recommended the following treatment hierarchy for varicose veins: endothermal ablation, ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy, surgery and compression hosiery. The aim of this paper is to review the randomised controlled trials that have compared endothermal ablation and ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy to determine if the level 1 evidence base still supports an “endothermal ablation first” strategy for the treatment of varicose veins. Methods A PubMed and OVID literature search (until 31 January 2015) was performed and randomised controlled trials comparing endothermal ablation and ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy were obtained. Results Although anatomical success appeared higher with endothermal ablation than ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy, clinical success and patient-reported outcomes measures were similar. Morbidity and complication rates were very low and not significantly different between endothermal ablation and ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy. Ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy was consistently less expensive that endothermal ablation. Conclusions All endovenous modalities appear to be successful and have a role in modern day practice. Although further work is required to optimise ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy technique to maximise anatomical success and minimise retreatment, the present level 1 evidence base shows there is no significant difference in clinical important outcomes between ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy and endothermal ablation. As ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy is less expensive, it is likely to be a more cost-effective option in most patients in most healthcare settings. Strict adherence to the treatment hierarchy recommended by National Institute for Health and Care Excellence seems unjustified. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In 2013, the new Dutch guideline for “Venous Pathology” was published. The guideline was a revision and update from the guideline “Diagnostics and Treatment of Varicose Veins” from 2009 and the guideline “Venous Ulcer” from 2005. A guideline for “Deep Venous Pathology” and one for “Compression Therapy” was added to the overall guideline “Venous Pathology.” The chapter about treatment of recurrent varicose veins after initial intervention was recently updated in 2015 and is reviewed here. The Dutch term “recidief varices” or the French “récidive de varices” should be used analogous to the English term “recurrent varicose veins.” The DCOP Guideline Development Group Neovarices concluded that “recidief” in Dutch actually suggests recurrence after apparent successful treatment and ignores the natural progression of venous disease in its own right. So the group opted to use the term “neovarices.” In the Dutch guideline, neovarices is meant to be an all embracing term for recurrent varicose veins caused by technical or tactical failure, evolvement from residual refluxing veins or natural progression of varicose vein disease at different locations of the treated leg after intervention. This report reviews the most important issues in the treatment of varicose vein recurrence, and discusses conclusions and recommendations of the Dutch Neovarices Guideline Committee. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Ultrasound guided sclerotherapy may be complicated by intra-arterial injections resulting in significant tissue necrosis. Here, we present a 69-year-old man with a history of right small saphenous vein “stripping”, presenting for the treatment of symptomatic lower limb varicose veins. Duplex ultrasound of the right lower limb outlined the pathway of venous incompetence. Despite the history of “stripping”, the small saphenous vein was present but the sapheno-popliteal junction was ligated at the level of the knee crease. No other unusual findings were reported at the time. During ultrasound guided sclerotherapy, subcutaneous vessels of the right posterior calf were noted to be pulsatile on B-mode ultrasound. Treatment was interrupted. Subsequent angiography and sonography showed absence of the right distal popliteal artery. A cluster of subcutaneous vessels of the right medial and posterior calf were found to be arterial collaterals masquerading as varicose veins. Injection sclerotherapy of these vessels would have resulted in significant tissue loss. This case highlights the importance of vigilance at the time of treatment and the invaluable role of ultrasound in guiding endovenous interventions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Foam sclerotherapy is a minimally invasive treatment for lower limb varicose veins. Current evidence indicates that its efficacy may not be as high as surgery or endovenous ablation. The minimally invasive nature of the treatment however means that it has a wide application, and it can be particularly useful in patients who are not suitable for other types of treatment. NICE guidelines recommend its use as a second line after endovenous ablation. Complication rates are low and most of these are of little clinical consequence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The longevity of foam made using sodium tetradecyl sulphate and gas (air or a CO2:O2 mixture) is increased significantly if silicone-free syringes are used over the normal syringes containing silicone oil lubrication. However, the plungers in silicone-free syringes start sticking after several passages when making foam for sclerotherapy, preventing the smooth injection of the resulting foam. We describe a three syringe technique which allows foam to be made using the Tessari Tourbillon ‘three-way stopcock’ principle between two syringes, but with the foam ending up in a third syringe which has not undergone multiple passages of the plunger. This allows a smoother injection of the resultant foam, which is particularly useful when injecting small diameter veins under ultrasound control. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses a technique for treating varicose veins disease of lower extremities with a treatment which is minimally invasive. Topics include information on the treatment option known as One-shot scleroembolization which doesn't need surgery or anesthesia, results of the study conducted on patients wherein no complications were observed and the conclusion of this technique.

Copyright of Acta Medica Croatica is the property of Croatian Academy of Medical Sciences and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Aim: Sclerotherapy is the targeted chemical ablation of varicose veins by intravenous injection of a liquid or foamed sclerosing drug. The treated veins may be intradermal, subcutaneous, and/or transfascial as well as superficial and deep in venous malformations. The aim of this guideline is to give evidence-based recommendations for liquid and foam sclerotherapy. Methods: This guideline was drafted on behalf of 23 European Phlebological Societies during a Guideline Conference on 7th–10th May 2012 in Mainz. The conference was organized by the German Society of Phlebology. Results: This guideline focuses on the two sclerosing drugs which are licensed in the majority of the European countries, Polidocanol (POL) and Sodium tetradecyl sulphate (STS). Other sclerosants are not discussed in detail. In this paper the recommendations concerning indications, contraindications, concentrations, volumes and technique of liquid and foam sclerotherapy of varicose veins and venous malformations are reviewed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: Sclerotherapy is the targeted chemical ablation of varicose veins by intravenous injection of a liquid or foamed sclerosing drug. The treated veins may be intradermal, subcutaneous, and/or transfascial as well as superficial and deep in venous malformations. The aim of this guideline is to give evidence-based recommendations for liquid and foam sclerotherapy. Methods: This guideline was drafted on behalf of 23 European Phlebological Societies during a Guideline Conference on 7th–10th May 2012 in Mainz. The conference was organized by the German Society of Phlebology. Results: This guideline focuses on the two sclerosing drugs which are licensed in the majority of the European countries, Polidocanol (POL) and Sodium tetradecyl sulphate (STS). Other sclerosants are not discussed in detail. In this paper the results from recent RCTs in sclerotherapy are reviewed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The aim of our case series was to show the therapeutic effect and the safety of the use of polidocanol foam in ultrasound-guided sclerotherapy treatment of relatively small postoperative seromas after varicose vein surgery. Methods: We treated six patients with postoperative seromas after varicose vein surgery that were refractory to conventional treatments including compression dressings, repeated needle aspirations and manual lymph drainage. Results: A complete regression of the fluid collections was seen after one and two ultrasound-guided injections of polidocanol foam into the seroma cavity in two cases, respectively. Up to five treatment sessions and up to four further needle aspirations were necessary for the remaining two patients until complete regression of the seromas. No side-effects were reported. Conclusion: This is the first case series to report of the regression of postoperative seromas after varicose vein surgery induced by polidocanol foam sclerotherapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Introduction: Lower extremity varicose vein is a common disease. Sclerotherapy can be used to treat truncal varices of the superficial venous system. This involves injecting a sclerosant intraluminally in order to cause fibrosis and eventual obliteration of the vein. Objective: To demonstrate the efficacy and safety of foam sclerotherapy in the treatment of great saphenous reflux measured against patient clinical examination and duplex scanning. Materials and methods: Fifty legs with varicose veins due to incompetent great saphenous vein were treated with ultrasound guided sclerosing foam prepared according to the Tessari method by mixing 3% polidocanol solution (Aethoxysclerol) with air using 2 disposable syringes and a three way tap producing high-quality micro-foam. Clinical examination and duplex scanning before and after the treatment with a mean follow up of 6months were done to every patient. Results: An average of 10ml of foam was required to close incompetent Great saphenous veins as defined by a reflux of more than 0.5s documented by duplex scan. At the 6th month of follow up, patients felt that their legs were treated successfully with resolution of symptoms and complete resolution in 96%. Conclusion: Foam sclerotherapy is a safe and effective therapy in treating varicose veins with high patient satisfaction and improvement in quality of life. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: Objectives and design: A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to compare clinical outcomes between endovenous laser ablation (EVLA), radiofrequency ablation (RFA), ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy (UGFS) and surgery. Methods: We searched MEDLINE and Scopus from 2000 to August 2011 to identify randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing EVLA, RFA, UGFS, and surgery or combinations of these for treatment of varicoses. Differences in clinical outcomes were expressed as pooled risk ratio and unstandardised mean difference for dichotomous and continuous outcomes, respectively. Methodological quality was assessed using Cochrane tools. Results: Twenty-eight RCTs were included. The primary failure and clinical recurrences were not significantly different between EVLA and RFA versus surgery with the pooled RR of 1.5 (95%CI:0.7, 3.0) and 1.3 (95%CI:0.7, 2.4) respectively for primary failure, and, 0.6 (95%CI:0.3, 1.1) and 0.9 (95%CI:0.6, 1.4) respectively for clinical recurrences. The endovenous techniques had advantages over surgery in lowering wound infections (RR = 0.3 (95%CI:0.1, 0.8) for EVLA), haematoma (RR = 0.5 (95%CI:0.3, 0.8) and 0.4 (95%CI:0.1, 0.8) for EVLA and RFA), and return to normal activities or work (mean differences = −4.9 days (95%CI:−7.1,−2.7) for RFA). Conclusions: The primary failure and recurrence in EVLA and RFA were non-significantly different compared with surgery. However, they had lower haematoma, less wound infection, less pain and quicker return to normal activities. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Foam sclerotherapy may result in drug and/or gas-related complications of a generalized or localized nature. Significant complications include anaphylactic/anaphylactoid reactions (very rare), deep vein thrombosis (1-3%), stroke (0.01%), superficial venous thrombosis (4.4%), tissue necrosis (variable frequency), oedema (0.5%) and nerve damage (0.2%). Cosmetic complications include telangiectatic matting (15-24%) and pigmentation (10-30%). Patent foramen ovale and other cardio-pulmonary right-to-left shunts seem to play a role in the systemic gas-related complications. In conclusion, foam sclerotherapy is characterized by an overall high degree of safety, though special attention should be given to the embolic and thrombotic complications. Good technique, adequate imaging, general precautions and compliance with post-treatment instructions may help avoid some of the adverse events and an appropriate early intervention may minimize possible sequelae. Higher volumes of sclerosant foam have been attributed to local and distant thrombotic complications and should be avoided. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: We assessed the use of ultrasound guided foam sclerotherapy (UGFS) to treat bilateral varicose veins either as synchronous or interval procedures. We specifically assessed total foam volume usage and its influence on early outcome and complications. Methods: We reviewed our prospectively compiled computerised database of patients with bilateral varicose veins who have undergone UGFS. Duplex findings, foam volumes used and clinical outcome were assessed. Results: One hundred and twelve patients had undergone UGFS for bilateral varicose veins. Sixty-one had bilateral UGFS (122 legs) and 51 had interval UGFS (102 legs). Seventy-eight percent bilateral and 60% interval procedures were for single trunk disease. Median foam volumes per treatment episode were: 17.5 mls bilateral, and 10 mls interval FS. At two weeks 81% of legs had complete occlusion after bilateral UGFS compared to 70% after interval UGFS. One patient in the bilateral UGFS developed transient visual disturbance. There was no systemic complications in the interval UGFS. Conclusions: Bilateral foam sclerotherapy treatment did not adversely affect vein occlusion rates and there was no significant difference in complication rates between the two groups. Bilateral UGFS can be safely performed in selected patient presenting with bilateral varicose veins. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Different catheters (angiography, single-balloon) have been used for foam sclerotherapy of the great saphenous vein (GSV). Objective: Is there greater efficacy and safety in the use of a double-balloon catheter? Methods: Twenty patients were treated with a double-balloon catheter and 3% polidocanol foam. Follow-up after one day, one and six weeks, six and 12 months. Results: Up to week six complete success was seen in 95% (19/20) patients. Only eight patients attended the checks after six and 12 months. The occlusion rates were 75% (6/8, 6 months) resp. 50% (4/8, 12 months). A further 10 patients refused these checks as they were free of symptoms but could be questioned. Side-effects were haematoma (100%), limited phlebitis (15%) and one extended thrombophlebitis followed by hyperpigmentation. Conclusion: A double-balloon catheter is a safe treatment option for foam sclerotherapy of the GSV. However, in this case series efficacy is not superior to the use of an angiographycatheter, a single-balloon catheter or just the direct puncture of the vein. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Compression sclerotherapy has been satisfactorily used for half a century for the treatment of varicose veins of the lower extremities. The effect of sclerosing solutions is that of making endofibrosis and vascular damage via producing endothelial injury. Different sclerosing agents were used by applying many different sclerotherapy methods. In recent years, sclerosing foam has been introduced in sclerotherapy with the goal of increasing the efficacy in the treatment of varicose veins. It is still uncertain whether foam or liquid form is superior. The aim of this study is to determine the efficacy and safety of the sclerosant polidocanol — which is a well-known detergent-type sclerosing agent — in foam form compared with liquid form. Methods: A total of 100 women patients with telengiectases and small varicose veins of less than 4 mm were included in this study. The patients were divided into two groups according to presenting dates. Fifty patients who presented first were classified as the first group. They were treated with Tessari's foam sclerotherapy method. The second fifty patients who presented later were placed in the second group. They were treated with the liquid form of polidocanol. Extremity veins that did not have insufficiency at the saphenofemoral junction were divided into three groups as ,1 mm, 1-2 mm and .2 but ,4 mm, and the veins were treated with 0.25%, 0.5% or 1% of polidocanol, respectively. Clinical improvement, patients' complaints and side-effects were determined after treatment. Results: Complete disappearance was determined in 84% of patients in the foam form group and in 72% in the liquid form group. Although polidocanol in foam form's success rate was higher than the liquid form of polidocanol to clear the vessels, this result did not reach statistical significance (P = 0.148). There was no significant difference also in the side effects between each group. Conclusion: Compression sclerotherapy is an effective and useful method for treating small varicose veins and telengiectases. Both polidocanol foam and polidocanol liquid forms are effective and safe sclerosing agents. The rates of side-effects were similar for both sclerotherapy methods. Although efficacy to clear the small varicose veins and telengiectases with foam polidocanol seems to be more successful than with liquid polidocanol, it is early to declare the superiority of the foam sclerotherapy method. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Varicose veins (VVs) are associated with lifestyle-limiting symptoms and complications. Patients who fail compression therapy are candidates for more invasive treatments. This study evaluates the efficacy and safety of endovenous foam sclerotherapy (EFS) for the treatment of VVs in a US academic center. We reviewed medical records of a consecutive cohort of patients who underwent EFS over a 2-year period. The primary outcome measure was obliteration of VVs. The secondary outcome measures were symptomatic improvement, ulcer healing, recurrence, and adverse events. A total of 166 patients (217 legs) underwent EFS for pain (81%), pruritis (41%), swelling (17%), ulcerations (17%), thrombophlebitis (14%), and varix rupture (3%). Complete (65%) or near-complete (34%) obliteration was achieved in 215 (99%) legs after one injection. Additional injections achieved complete obliteration in 39 of 53 legs. Ninety-three percent (27/29) of active ulcers healed or were decreasing in size. Five ulcers and 11 VVs recurred. Common adverse events included pain and hyperpigmentation. Thrombosis, hematoma, skin necrosis, and neurologic events were rare. In conclusion, EFS appears to be a safe and effective outpatient therapy for the treatment of symptomatic and complicated VVs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Ambulatory phlebectomies and foam sclerotherapy are two of the most common treatments for varicose vein tributaries. Many studies have been published on these treatments, but few comparative studies have attempted to determine their relative effectiveness.Methods/design: This is a prospective single-centre randomised clinical trial. Patients with primary truncal vein incompetence and varicose vein tributaries requiring treatment will be assigned randomly to either ambulatory phlebectomies or foam sclerotherapy. The primary outcome measure is the re-intervention rate for the varicose vein tributaries during the study period. The secondary outcomes include the degree of pain during the first two post-operative weeks and the time to return to usual activities or work. Improvements in clinical scores, quality of life scores, occlusion rates and cost-effectiveness for each intervention are other secondary outcomes. The re-intervention rate will be considered from the third month.Discussion: This study compares ambulatory phlebectomies and foam sclerotherapy in the treatment of varicose vein tributaries. The re-intervention rates, safety, patient experience and the cost-effectiveness of each intervention will be assessed. This study aims to recruit 160 patients and is expected to be completed by the end of 2019.Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03416413 . Registered on 31 January 2018. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]