Search

Objectives: Radiofrequency-based procedure is one of the leading methods of endovenous thermal ablation. The most fundamental difference with regards to currently available radiofrequency ablation systems is the way of electric current flow given to the vein wall; bipolar segmental and monopolar ablation. This study aimed to compare the monopolar ablation method with conventional bipolar segmental endovenous radiofrequency ablation method for the management of incompetent saphenous veins. Methods: Between November 2019 and November 2021, 121 patients with incompetent varicose veins who were treated either with the F-Care/monopolar (N = 49) or ClosureFast/bipolar (N = 72) were included in the study. A single extremity of each patient with isolated great saphenous vein insufficiency was enrolled. The differences between the two groups in demographic parameters, disease severity, treated veins, peri- and postoperative complications, and treatment efficacy indicators were retrospectively evaluated. Results: There was no statistically significant difference between the groups regarding demographic parameters, disease severity, and treated veins in preoperative period (p > 0,05). The average procedural time was 21.4 ± 4 minutes in the monopolar group, while it was 17.1 ± 3 minutes in the bipolar group. In both groups, the venous clinical severity scores declined significantly compared with the preoperative period, however; there was no difference between groups (p > 0,05). The occlusion rate of the saphenofemoral junction and proximal saphenous vein after 1 year was 94.1% in the bipolar group and 91.8% in the monopolar group (p = 0.4) while there was a significant difference in the occlusion rate of the shaft and distal part of the saphenous vein (93.2% in the bipolar group and 80.4% in the monopolar group, p = 0.04). Postoperative complications (bruising and skin pigmentation) were slightly higher in the bipolar group (p = 0.02, p = 0.01). Conclusions: Both systems are effective in treating the venous insufficiency of the lower extremity. Monopolar system revealed a better early postoperative course with similar occlusion rate of the proximal part of saphenous vein compared with bipolar system, however; the occlusion of the lower half of the saphenous vein was significantly lower which may negatively affect long-term occlusion rates and recurrence of the disease. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Standard treatment for deep venous thromboembolism involves parenteral anticoagulation overlapping with a vitamin K antagonist, an approach that is effective but associated with limitations including the need for frequent coagulation monitoring. The direct oral anticoagulant rivaroxaban is similarly effective to standard therapy as a single-drug treatment for venous thromboembolism and does not require routine coagulation monitoring. The aim of this analysis was to project the long-term costs and outcomes for rivaroxaban compared to standard of care (tinzaparin/warfarin). Methods A total of 184 patients who were under anticoagulant therapy with warfarin or rivaroxaban for extended deep venous thromboembolism were retrospectively evaluated; 59 received rivaroxaban and 125 received warfarin therapy. Assessments were made on age, gender, place of residence, the duration of anticoagulation, mean international normalized ratio value, the effective rate of international normalized ratio (time in the therapeutic range), bleeding-related complication rate, duration of hospitalization due to complications, the number of annual outpatient department admission, cost for drug, cost for hospitalization, cost for outpatient department admission and international normalized ratio measurements. Results The annual outpatient cost is higher in warfarin group (147.09 ± 78 vs. 62.32 ± 19.79 USD p < 0.001). But annual drug cost is higher in rivaroxaban group (362.6 vs. 71.55 ± 31.01 USD p < 0.001). Overall cost of rivaroxaban group is higher than warfarin group (476.25 ± 36.78 vs. 364.82 ± 174.44 USD). Warfarin is not cost-effective when non-drug costs (342.5 ± 174.44 vs. 113.65 ± 36.77) and hospital costs (173.85 ± 122.73 vs. 64.9 ± 23.55 USD) were analyzed. Conclusion This analysis suggests that rivaroxaban has lower costs than warfarin in terms of outpatient department admission and hospital costs due to complications; however, warfarin was more economic when all cost parameters were considered. Time in the therapeutic range was found as 56% for warfarin that should be taken into account while analyzing costs and benefits. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Study: We report our results on a case series of 19 patients receiving platelet-rich plasma application in treatment of patients with chronic unhealing venous leg ulcers.Material and Methods: There were 16 males and three females with a mean age of 38.55 ± 16.46 years. Planimetric size measurements were performed and pain was tested throughout the treatment period. Follow-up was made in seven-day periods. Patients received 5 ml of platelet-rich plasma for each 5 cm(2) of the wound surface with half of the amount being injected 1-2 mm deep into the wound and the wound surface was covered with the remaining half.Results: Complete wound healing occurred in 18 of 19 patients (94.7%) within a mean of 4.82 ± 2.16 week. There were significant reductions in wound area among all consecutive measurements except for first week. A significant reduction in wound volume was apparent even in first week and sustained among consecutive measurements.Conclusion: Platelet-rich plasma seems effective in terms of promoting healing of venous leg ulcers. Improvement in wound depth was slightly more prominent than that in wound area, indicating a potential role of platelet-rich plasma especially in deep venous ulcers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]