Search

The initial diagnosis of retroperitoneal bleeding can be challenging by physical examination and clinical presentation. Prompt imaging can make the diagnosis and be lifesaving. When selecting appropriate imaging for these patient's, consideration must be made for sensitivity and ability to image the retroperitoneum, as well as speed of imaging.The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of well-established methodologies (RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where evidence is lacking or equivocal, expert opinion may supplement the available evidence to recommend imaging or treatment.

Acute iliofemoral deep vein thrombosis may present with pain and swelling or phlegmasia cerulea dolens. When thrombosis occurs in the setting of an underlying venous obstruction, stent reconstruction should be performed after thrombus clearance to prevent rethrombosis. Stent reconstruction after thrombus clearance is associated with high technical success rates and durable patency. This report describes transient lower extremity arterial insufficiency and neurologic deficit after external iliac vein stent expansion and reconstruction within a confined space resulting from a malignant obstruction. It serves as a cautionary tale that, in rare cases, aggressive venous stenting within a confined space can transfer clinically significant forces to adjacent arteries and nerves.

The International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement assembled an international working group of venous thromboembolism experts and patient representatives to develop a standardised minimum set of outcomes and outcome measurements for integration into clinical practice and potentially research to support clinical decision making and benchmarking of quality of care. 15 core outcomes important to patients and health-care professionals were selected and categorised into four domains: patient-reported outcomes, long term consequences of the disease, disease-specific complications, and treatment-related complications. The outcomes and outcome measures were designed to apply to all patients with venous thromboembolism aged 16 years or older. A measurement tool package was selected for inclusion in the core standard set, with a minimum number of items to be measured at predefined timepoints, which capture all core outcomes. Additional measures can be introduced to the user by a cascade opt-in system that allows for further assessment if required. This set of outcomes and measurement tools will facilitate the implementation of the use of patient-centred outcomes in daily practice.

Background Superficial venous disease of the lower extremity has a significant impact on quality of life. Both truncal and tributary vein reflux contribute to this disease process. Endovenous foam sclerotherapy is a widely used technique throughout the world for the management of superficial venous reflux and ultrasound guidance improves its safety and efficacy. Methods A PubMed search for ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy (UGFS) was conducted and all abstracts were reviewed to identify clinical trials and systematic reviews for a full-text analysis. Additional articles were also identified through searching the references of the selected studies. Results The production of foam for sclerotherapy in a 1:3 or 1:4 ratio of air to sclerosant is optimal in a low silicone, low-volume syringe system. Physiologic gas may decrease any side effects, with the trade-off of decreased foam stability. Proper technique with appropriate sterility and cleansing protocols are paramount for safe and effective treatment. The technical success of UGFS for great saphenous vein disease is inferior to endothermal and surgical modalities and retreatment is more common. However, the clinical improvement in patient-reported quality of life is similar between these three modalities. When used for tributary veins in combination with endothermal approaches of the truncal veins, UGFS has high rates of success with excellent patient satisfaction. UGFS has demonstrated an excellent safety profile comparable with or superior to other modalities. Conclusions With proper technique, UGFS is safe and effective for the management of superficial venous disease.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) global pandemic has resulted in diversion of healthcare resources to the management of patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 virus. Elective interventions and surgical procedures in most countries have been postponed and operating room resources have been diverted to manage the pandemic. The Venous and Lymphatic Triage and Acuity Scale was developed to provide an international standard to rationalise and harmonise the management of patients with venous and lymphatic disorders or vascular anomalies. Triage urgency was determined based on clinical assessment of urgency with which a patient would require medical treatment or surgical intervention. Clinical conditions were classified into six categories of: (1) venous thromboembolism (VTE), (2) chronic venous disease, (3) vascular anomalies, (4) venous trauma, (5) venous compression and (6) lymphatic disease. Triage urgency was categorised into four groups and individual conditions were allocated to each class of triage. These included (1) medical emergencies (requiring immediate attendance), example massive pulmonary embolism; (2) urgent (to be seen as soon as possible), example deep vein thrombosis; (3) semi-urgent (to be attended to within 30-90 days), example highly symptomatic chronic venous disease, and (4) discretionary/non-urgent- (to be seen within 6-12 months), example chronic lymphoedema. Venous and Lymphatic Triage and Acuity Scale aims to standardise the triage of patients with venous and lymphatic disease or vascular anomalies by providing an international consensus-based classification of clinical categories and triage urgency. The scale may be used during pandemics such as the current COVID-19 crisis but may also be used as a general framework to classify urgency of the listed conditions.

A woman with an upper extremity brachioaxillary arteriovenous dialysis graft presented with a 9-month history of profound ipsilateral arm swelling and numbness secondary to chronic axillosubclavian vein occlusion. Previous endovascular and open venous recanalization attempts were unsuccessful. A totally percutaneous extra-anatomic venous bi-bypass was created to salvage the dialysis access circuit and reconstruct the deep venous system. Using overlapping Viabahn stent-grafts, two parallel bypasses were created from the arteriovenous graft and brachial vein, respectively, to the brachiocephalic vein. The hemodialysis graft regained function. Upper extremity symptoms resolved within 48 h. This is the first reported percutaneous double-barrel technique of extra-anatomic venous bypass creation for simultaneous management of a failed dialysis access and chronic venous occlusive disease.

ObjectivesMedical compression therapy is used for non-invasive treatment of venous and lymphatic diseases. Medical compression therapy-associated adverse events and contraindications have been reported, although some contraindications are theoretically based. This consensus statement provides recommendations on medical compression therapy risks and contraindications.MethodsA systematic literature search of medical compression therapy publications reporting adverse events up until November 2017 was performed. A consensus panel comprising 15 international experts critically reviewed the publications and formulated the recommendations.ResultsSixty-two publications reporting medical compression therapy adverse events were identified. The consensus panel issued 21 recommendations on medical compression therapy contraindications and adverse event risk mitigation, in addition to reviewing medical compression therapy use in borderline indications. The most frequently reported non-severe medical compression therapy-associated adverse events included skin irritation, discomfort and pain. Very rare but severe adverse events, including soft tissue and nerve injury, were also identified.ConclusionThis consensus statement summarises published medical compression therapy-associated adverse events and contraindications, and provides guidance on medical compression therapy. Severe medical compression therapy-associated adverse events are very rarely encountered if compression is used correctly and contraindications are considered.

To evaluate temporal trends, practice variation, and associated outcomes with the use of intravascular ultrasound (US) during deep venous stent placement among Medicare beneficiaries.All lower extremity deep venous stent placement procedures performed between January 1, 2017, and December 31, 2019 among Medicare beneficiaries were included. Temporal trends in intravascular US use were stratified by procedural setting and physician specialty. The primary outcome was a composite of 12-month all-cause mortality, all-cause hospitalization, or repeat target vessel intervention. The secondary outcome was a composite of 12-month stent thrombosis, embolization, or restenosis.Among the 20,984 deep venous interventions performed during the study period, 15,184 (72.4%) utilized intravascular US. Moderate growth in intravascular US use was observed during the study period in all clinical settings. There was a variation in the use of intravascular US among all operators (median, 77.3% of cases; interquartile range, 20.0%-99.2%). In weighted analyses, intravascular US use during deep venous stent placement was associated with a lower risk of both the primary (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.72; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.69-0.76; P.001) and secondary (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.27-0.39; P.001) composite end points.Intravascular US is frequently used during deep venous stent placement among Medicare beneficiaries, with further increase in use from 2017 to 2019. The utilization of intravascular US as part of a procedural strategy was associated with a lower cumulative incidence of adverse outcomes after the procedure, including venous stent thrombosis and embolization.

The optimal medical management of patients following endovascular deep venous interventions remains ill-defined. As such, the Society of Interventional Radiology Foundation (SIRF) convened a multidisciplinary group of experts in a virtual Research Consensus Panel (RCP) to develop a prioritized research agenda regarding antithrombotic therapy following deep venous interventions. The panelists presented the gaps in knowledge followed by discussion and ranking of research priorities based on clinical relevance, overall impact, and technical feasibility. The following research topics were identified as high priority: 1) characterization of biological processes leading to in-stent stenosis/rethrombosis; 2) identification and validation of methods to assess venous flow dynamics and their effect on stent failure; 3) elucidation of the role of inflammation and anti-inflammatory therapies; and 4) clinical studies to compare antithrombotic strategies and improve venous outcome assessment. Collaborative, multicenter research is necessary to answer these questions and thereby enhance the care of patients with venous disease.

The benefit for carotid endarterectomy (CEA) to prevent a potential stroke has been shown to be less beneficial for women compared with men and the risk of carotid stenting (CAS) is higher in women than men. We hypothesized that a community-based Washington state registry data would also reveal increased morbidity and mortality for women undergoing carotid interventions.Deidentified data for CEA and CAS between 2010 and 2015 were obtained from 19 hospitals participating in the Washington State Vascular-Interventional Surgical Care and Outcomes Assessment Program. Data analysis compared in-hospital composite outcome of stroke and mortality from CEA and CAS between women and men.Over the study period, 3704 individuals underwent CEA (n = 2759; 49.5% symptomatic) and CAS (n = 945; 60.9% symptomatic). Women accounted for 39.5% of the cohort. Women were slightly younger than men (70.0 ± 10.2 vs 71.0 ± 9.6 years respectively; P .01), less likely to be smokers (70.1% vs 75.6%; P .01), and less likely to have a diagnosis of coronary artery disease (32.9% vs 46.5%; P .01). Fewer women underwent CEA for symptomatic carotid disease (46.1% vs 51.8%; P .01). There were no statistically significant differences in the postoperative in-hospital stroke and mortality among women and men undergoing CEA (asymptomatic, 0.8% vs 1.4% [P = .36]; symptomatic, 1.8% vs 2.2% [P = .58]) and CAS (asymptomatic, 1.4% vs 2.2% [P = .56]; symptomatic, 4.6% vs 2.5% [P = .18]). Hospital duration of stay and discharge disposition were similar for women and men. A subanalysis of the octogenarian cohort undergoing CAS demonstrated a substantial increase in-hospital stroke and mortality among women and men (11.6% [CAS] vs 2.2% [CEA]; P = .024).In the Washington state Vascular-Interventional Surgical Care and Outcomes Assessment Program registry, hospital composite outcome of stroke and mortality following carotid interventions from 2010 to 2015 were noted to be similar for women and men. The notable exception to this finding was observed in subcohort of women undergoing CAS for symptomatic carotid disease at age 80 years or older. These findings should be taken into account when risk stratifying patients for carotid interventions.

This Practice Guidelines document has been co-published in Phlebology [DOI: 10.1177/0268355521999559] and Journal of Vascular Surgery: Venous and Lymphatic Disorders [DOI: 10.1016/j.jvsv.2020.12.084]. The publications are identical except for minor stylistic and spelling differences in keeping with each journal’s style. The contribution has been published under a Attribution-Non Commercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0), (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) With the support of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the American Vein & Lymphatic Society, the American Venous Forum, the Canadian Society of Phlebology, the Cardiovascular and Interventional Radiology Society of Europe, the European Venous Forum, the International Pelvic Pain Society, the International Union of Phlebology, the Korean Society of Interventional Radiology, the Society of Interventional Radiology, and the Society for Vascular Surgery As the importance of pelvic venous disorders (PeVD) has been increasingly recognized, progress in the field has been limited by the lack of a valid and reliable classification instrument. Misleading historical nomenclature, such as the May-Thurner, pelvic congestion, and nutcracker syndromes, often fails to recognize the interrelationship of many pelvic symptoms and their underlying pathophysiology. Based on a perceived need, the American Vein and Lymphatic Society convened an international, multidisciplinary panel charged with the development of a discriminative classification instrument for PeVD. This instrument, the Symptoms-Varices-Pathophysiology (“SVP”) classification for PeVD, includes three domains—Symptoms (S), Varices (V), and Pathophysiology (P), with the pathophysiology domain encompassing the Anatomic (A), Hemodynamic (H), and Etiologic (E) features of the patient’s disease. An individual patient’s classification is designated as SVPA,H,E. For patients with pelvic origin lower extremity signs or symptoms, the SVP instrument is complementary to and should be used in conjunction with the Clinical-Etiologic-Anatomic-Physiologic (CEAP) classification. The SVP instrument accurately defines the diverse patient populations with PeVD, an important step in improving clinical decision making, developing disease-specific outcome measures and identifying homogenous patient populations for clinical trials.

A woman with an upper extremity brachioaxillary arteriovenous dialysis graft presented with a 9-month history of profound ipsilateral arm swelling and numbness secondary to chronic axillosubclavian vein occlusion. Previous endovascular and open venous recanalization attempts were unsuccessful. A totally percutaneous extra-anatomic venous bi-bypass was created to salvage the dialysis access circuit and reconstruct the deep venous system. Using overlapping Viabahn stent-grafts, two parallel bypasses were created from the arteriovenous graft and brachial vein, respectively, to the brachiocephalic vein. The hemodialysis graft regained function. Upper extremity symptoms resolved within 48 h. This is the first reported percutaneous double-barrel technique of extra-anatomic venous bypass creation for simultaneous management of a failed dialysis access and chronic venous occlusive disease.

To determine important symptoms and functional effects of venous malformations (VMs) to assess the content validity of commonly used patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures for use with VM patients.This cross-sectional, qualitative study involved cognitive interviews with participants with VM aged ≥ 14 years. From February to June 2016, 11 participants (8 female) with a mean (± standard deviation) age of 31 ± 15 years were recruited from three clinical sites. The following subgroups were evaluated: 5 adults (aged ≥ 18) with trunk/extremity VMs; 3 adolescents (aged 14-17) with trunk/extremity VMs; and 3 adults with head/neck VMs. We evaluated the content validity of the Worst Pain Numeric Rating Scale (NRS), Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS®) Pain Interference 8-item short form, and PROMIS Physical Function 8-item short form.The most common participant-reported VM symptoms were swelling (n = 10), skin discoloration (n = 8), acute episodic pain (n = 8), chronic pain (n = 7), numbness (n = 7), and tingling/burning (n = 6). Participants reported that VMs affected their physical function (n = 10), appearance (n = 10), relationships/social activities (n = 7), and emotional health (n = 3). The Worst Pain NRS and PROMIS Pain Interference measures were relevant to all participants' VM experience. Only adults with head/neck VMs found the PROMIS Physical Function measure to be irrelevant. The assessed PRO measures did not address several symptoms commonly reported by VM patients (swelling, skin discoloration, numbness, and appearance).These results suggest that several VM symptoms are not assessed fully by commonly used PRO measures, and that the relevance of functional limitation questions may vary by VM location.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) global pandemic has resulted in diversion of healthcare resources to the management of patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 virus. Elective interventions and surgical procedures in most countries have been postponed and operating room resources have been diverted to manage the pandemic. The Venous and Lymphatic Triage and Acuity Scale was developed to provide an international standard to rationalise and harmonise the management of patients with venous and lymphatic disorders or vascular anomalies. Triage urgency was determined based on clinical assessment of urgency with which a patient would require medical treatment or surgical intervention. Clinical conditions were classified into six categories of: (1) venous thromboembolism (VTE), (2) chronic venous disease, (3) vascular anomalies, (4) venous trauma, (5) venous compression and (6) lymphatic disease. Triage urgency was categorised into four groups and individual conditions were allocated to each class of triage. These included (1) medical emergencies (requiring immediate attendance), example massive pulmonary embolism; (2) urgent (to be seen as soon as possible), example deep vein thrombosis; (3) semi-urgent (to be attended to within 30–90 days), example highly symptomatic chronic venous disease, and (4) discretionary/non-urgent- (to be seen within 6–12 months), example chronic lymphoedema. Venous and Lymphatic Triage and Acuity Scale aims to standardise the triage of patients with venous and lymphatic disease or vascular anomalies by providing an international consensus-based classification of clinical categories and triage urgency. The scale may be used during pandemics such as the current COVID-19 crisis but may also be used as a general framework to classify urgency of the listed conditions.

This article describes the development of the Claudication Symptom Instrument (CSI) and its measurement properties for evaluating the symptom experience of patients diagnosed with intermittent claudication (IC). We conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews with IC patients for item development and cognitive interviews in which patient comprehension of items was tested. We evaluated measurement properties using data collected and analyzed in the context of an observational comparative effectiveness study of IC treatments. Items measuring five symptom important to patients were developed and cognitively tested: Pain, Numbness, Heaviness, Cramping, and Tingling. Item means (higher means worse) ranged from 1.1 (Tingling) to 2.3 (Pain) (range: 0 ‘none’ to 4 ‘extreme’). Rasch analysis yielded support for an overall score (χ2=26.5, df=20, p=0.15). The total CSI score differed by clinician-rated severity of mild versus moderate ( p

On July 20, 2016, a Medicare Evidence Development and Coverage Advisory Committee panel convened to assess the evidence supporting treatment of chronic venous disease. Several societies addressed the questions posed to the panel. A multidisciplinary coalition, representing nine societies of venous specialists, reviewed the literature and presented a consensus opinion regarding the panel questions. The purpose of this paper is to present our coalition's consensus review of the literature and recommendations for chronic venous disease.

Women have been shown to experience inferior outcomes following intact and ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) treatment in endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) and open surgical repair (OSR) groups. The goal of our study was to compare gender-specific presentation, management, and early outcomes after AAA repair using a statewide registry.We utilized the Washington State's Vascular Interventional Surgical Care and Outcomes Assessment Program registry data collected in 19 hospitals from July 2010 to September 2013. Demographics, presentation, procedural data, and outcomes in elective and emergent AAA repair groups were analyzed.We identified 1,231 patients (19.6% women) who underwent intact (86.4%) or ruptured AAA (13.6%) repairs. Nine thousand seventy-two (79.0%) patients had EVAR and 259 (21.0%) had OSR. Men and women were of equivalent age and had similar comorbidities, except that women had less coronary artery disease (P 0.01) and were more likely to suffer from chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (P = 0.05). Women had smaller aneurysm diameters (5.8 ± 1.1 vs. 6.2 ± 1.8 cm, P 0.01) at the time of presentation and men had slightly higher incidence of rupture at larger aneurysm size. Men were more likely to undergo EVAR, with significant differences in elective (82.1% vs. 74.1%, P = 0.01), but not ruptured repair. Women had significantly higher mortality rates following elective EVAR (3.1% vs. 0.6%, P = 0.01), but not after ruptured or elective open repair. Following elective EVAR, women were less likely to be discharged to home after longer hospital stays (3 vs. 2 days, P 0.01).Despite presentation at a similar age, with a smaller aneurysm diameter, and similar medical comorbidities, women experience substantially worse hospital outcomes primarily driven by elective endovascular procedures. Utilization of endovascular techniques in women still remains lower compared with men. Improvement of elective outcomes in women will likely depend on technical advancements in repair techniques and management strategies that may differ between genders.

Venous disorders of the abdomen and pelvis are part of the spectrum of chronic venous disease and often play a role in lower extremity disease. The anatomy, pathophysiology, and treatment of pelvic venous disease are only beginning to be understood. Rather than being a disparate group of syndromes (e.g., May- Thurner, pelvic congestion, and nutcrackers syndromes), it is becoming clear that although much more complex, the abdominal and pelvic venous systems should be approached in a systematic way similar to the lower extremities. Reflux and/or obstruction in various components of the abdominal and pelvic veins often results in similar clinical symptoms, posing complex diagnostic and therapeutic questions. It is useful to consider the venous circulation of the pelvis to consist of three multiple interconnected venous systems—the left renal and ovarian veins, the iliac veins (common, external, and internal), and the lower extremity veins. The spectrum of pelvic venous disorders includes four clinical presentations—chronic pelvic pain, pelvic source varices of the leg, symptoms related to renal venous hypertension, and leg swelling. Venography has been the historical gold standard for the diagnosis of pelvic venous disorders. Improving the care of women with these disorders will require a better understanding of abdominal and pelvic venous anatomy; improved comprehension of the relative importance of pelvic venous reflux and obstruction in individual patients; validation of diagnostic protocols, particularly with respect to ultrasound; robust clinical trials evaluating the management of pelvic venous reflux and obstruction; and validated patient-centered outcome measures.

This chapter summarizes the most important current guidelines on evaluation and management of patients with chronic venous disease adopted by our two major vascular societies, SVS and AVF. The best evidence is usually provided by systematic reviews and meta-analyses of prospective randomized trials. The approach developed by the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) working group has been adopted by the Society for Vascular Surgery and the American Venous Forum in developing practice guidelines. Evaluation of the patient with venous disease should include a thorough history, focusing on the underlying etiology (congenital, primary, or secondary), symptoms, and risk factors for venous disease. Duplex ultrasonography, including an evaluation of reflux in the upright position, should be the initial diagnostic test in patients with suspected venous disease. Compression is considered first-line therapy for chronic venous disorders. A systematic review of 44 randomized, placebo-controlled trials evaluating oral phlebotonics suggested efficacy for some signs such as edema, although the global evidence for their efficacy was insufficient to recommend routine use. During the past 2 decades, an array of endovenous techniques have emerged and have largely replaced high ligation and stripping for the management of saphenous vein reflux. The potential value of interruption of pathologic perforators (>3.5 mm, reflux ≥ 0.5 second, located near the ulcer bed) in C5–C6 disease cannot be excluded. Because of lack of controlled prospective studies, the quality of evidence to support iliac vein stenting remains weak.

Pelvic congestion syndrome is one of the many causes of chronic pelvic pain and is often diagnosed based on exclusion of other pathologies. Over the past decades, pelvic congestion syndrome was recognized to be a more common cause of chronic pelvic pain. Multiple diagnostic modalities including pelvic duplex ultrasonography, transvaginal ultrasonography, computed tomography, and magnetic resonance were studied. In the current literature, selective ovarian venography, an invasive imaging approach, is believed to be the gold standard for diagnosing pelvic congestion syndrome.

The American College of Phlebology Guidelines Committee performed a systematic review of the literature regarding the clinical impact and treatment of incompetent accessory saphenous veins. Using an accepted process for guideline developments, we developed a consensus opinion that patients with symptomatic incompetence of the accessory great saphenous veins (anterior and posterior accessory saphenous veins) be treated with endovenous thermal ablation (laser or radiofrequency) or ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy to eliminate symptomatology (Recommendation Grade 1C).

Varicose veins affect one-quarter to one-third of Western adult populations and consume an increasing amount of health care resources. Much of this increased utilization has been driven by the advent of minimally invasive technology including endovenous thermal ablation, foam sclerotherapy, and more recently mechanicochemical and cyanoacrylate glue ablation. This has largely been driven by patient and physician preferences in the absence of robust evidence that one therapy is truly superior to another. This partially arises from misunderstandings about appropriate outcomes measures and what truly constitutes effective treatment of varicose veins. Technical outcomes, such as saphenous closure rates, have frequently been used as surrogates for effective treatment but are poorly correlated with symptom improvement, quality of life, and risk of recurrence. Although there does appear to be a trend towards higher recurrence with ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy, the data are occasionally conflicting and there does not appear to be substantial differences between the various modalities. Similarly, there do not appear to be major differences in late quality of life measures between these treatment options. As long-term differences in recurrence and quality of life are small, overall cost effectiveness is driven primarily by initial treatment costs and ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy is the most cost-effective strategy in many models. However, there continues to be substantial uncertainty surrounding cost estimates and other factors of importance to the patient may ultimately drive treatment decisions. The benefits of some adjuncts to the treatment of axial superficial reflux, such as the concurrent versus staged management of tributary varicosities, remain ill-defined while that of others, such as routine post-procedural ultrasound surveillance and compression, need critical re-evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Diabetes mellitus continues to grow in global prevalence and to consume an increasing amount of health care resources. One of the key areas of morbidity associated with diabetes is the diabetic foot. To improve the care of patients with diabetic foot and to provide an evidence-based multidisciplinary management approach, the Society for Vascular Surgery in collaboration with the American Podiatric Medical Association and the Society for Vascular Medicine developed this clinical practice guideline. METHODS: The committee made specific practice recommendations using the Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system. This was based on five systematic reviews of the literature. Specific areas of focus included (1) prevention of diabetic foot ulceration, (2) off-loading, (3) diagnosis of osteomyelitis, (4) wound care, and (5) peripheral arterial disease. RESULTS: Although we identified only limited high-quality evidence for many of the critical questions, we used the best available evidence and considered the patients' values and preferences and the clinical context to develop these guidelines. We include preventive recommendations such as those for adequate glycemic control, periodic foot inspection, and patient and family education. We recommend using custom therapeutic footwear in high-risk diabetic patients, including those with significant neuropathy, foot deformities, or previous amputation. In patients with plantar diabetic foot ulcer (DFU), we recommend off-loading with a total contact cast or irremovable fixed ankle walking boot. In patients with a new DFU, we recommend probe to bone test and plain films to be followed by magnetic resonance imaging if a soft tissue abscess or osteomyelitis is suspected. We provide recommendations on comprehensive wound care and various débridement methods. For DFUs that fail to improve (>50% wound area reduction) after a minimum of 4 weeks of standard wound therapy, we recommend adjunctive wound therapy options. In patients with DFU who have peripheral arterial disease, we recommend revascularization by either surgical bypass or endovascular therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Whereas these guidelines have addressed five key areas in the care of DFUs, they do not cover all the aspects of this complex condition. Going forward as future evidence accumulates, we plan to update our recommendations accordingly.

Not available

Venous ultrasound is the standard imaging test for patients suspected of having acute deep venous thrombosis (DVT). There is variability and disagreement among authoritative groups regarding the necessary components of the test. Some protocols include scanning the entire lower extremity, whereas others recommend scans limited to the thigh and knee supplemented with serial testing. Some protocols use gray-scale ultrasound alone, whereas others include Doppler interrogation. Point-of-care ultrasound is recommended in some settings, and there is heterogeneity of these protocols as well. Heterogeneity of recommendations can lead to errors including incorrect application of guidelines, confusion among requesting physicians, and incorrect follow-up. In October 2016, the Society of Radiologists in Ultrasound convened a multidisciplinary panel of experts to evaluate the current evidence to develop recommendations regarding ultrasound protocols for DVT and the terminology used to communicate results to clinicians. Recommendations were made after open discussion and by unanimous consensus. The panel recommends a comprehensive duplex ultrasound protocol from thigh to ankle with Doppler at selected sites rather than a limited or complete compression-only examination. This protocol is currently performed in many facilities and is achievable with standard ultrasound equipment and personnel. The use of these recommendations will increase the diagnosis of calf DVT and provide better data to explain the presenting symptoms. The panel recommends a single point-of-care protocol that minimizes underdiagnoses of proximal DVT. The panel recommends the term chronic postthrombotic change to describe the residual material that persists after the acute presentation of DVT to avoid potential overtreatment of prior thrombus. Adoption of a single standardized comprehensive duplex ultrasound and a single point-of-care examination will enhance patient safety and clinicians’ confidence.

Chronic pelvic pain accounts for approximately 10% of outpatient gynecologic visits and among the varied causes, pelvic congestion syndrome is second only to endometriosis in frequency. Manifestations may include pelvic pain, dyspareunia, dysuria, and dysmenorrhea as well as external varices and a number of psychosocial symptoms. Although a variety of treatments have been proposed—including pharmacologic ovarian suppression, hysterectomy with or without oophorectomy, and ovarian vein resection—transcatheter embolization is the least invasive and most efficacious management option. Complete or partial symptom improvement has been reported in 68.2–100% of patients and there has been a consistent reduction in visual analog pain scores after treatment. Based upon these results, recommendation of either pharmacotherapy or other surgical procedures is difficult to justify. However, it is also clear that 6–31.8% of patients do not get substantial relief from pelvic venous embolization. Potential explanations for an inadequate response to treatment include patient variability, procedural variability, and inadequate outcome measures. The latter are particularly important and future investigation should focus on the development of disease-specific quality of life measures as well as identifying those aspects of the procedure, such as choice of embolic agents and extent of embolization, associated with the best clinical outcomes.

Objective Post-thrombotic syndrome is a chronic complication of acute deep venous thrombosis in the lower extremity. The role of graduated compression stockings in the prevention of post-thrombotic syndrome has been studied with opinion being divided on the beneficial effects. We aim to answer this question with a randomized controlled study that uses multiple scoring instruments to assess post-thrombotic syndrome. Methods Sixty-nine consecutive patients with acute deep venous thrombosis diagnosed by duplex ultrasonography were randomized to treatment with graduated compression stockings or no graduated compression stockings. Venous Clinical Severity Score and Villalta-Prandoni Score, commonly used scoring systems, were used to appraise post-thrombotic syndrome at 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months following diagnosis of deep venous thrombosis. In both scoring systems, the individual either had post-thrombotic syndrome or no post-thrombotic syndrome. Cumulative incidence was computed using Kaplan–Meier analysis. Relative risk was assessed for age, obesity, varicose veins, and iliofemoral deep venous thrombosis. Results As measured by both Villalta-Prandoni Score and Venous Clinical Severity Score instruments, the graduated compression stockings group had a lower incidence of post-thrombotic syndrome compared to the control group, but only when one month was used as cut off time for the first diagnosis of post-thrombotic syndrome. When 6 or 12 months were used, there was no difference in the incidence of post-thrombotic syndrome between the two groups. The burden of post-thrombotic syndrome was significantly more when the Villalta-Prandoni Score instrument (∼75%) was used as compared to the Venous Clinical Severity Score instrument (∼30%) at 24 months’ follow-up. Obesity was the only statistically significant predictor for the development of post-thrombotic syndrome. Conclusion As assessed by both Villalta-Prandoni Score and Venous Clinical Severity Score instruments, use of graduated compression stockings does not reduce the incidence of post-thrombotic syndrome. There is a significant difference in the incidence post-thrombotic syndrome as detected by Villalta-Prandoni Score and Venous Clinical Severity Score instruments with incidence of post-thrombotic syndrome dependent on instrument and cut off time interval used to assess post-thrombotic syndrome. However, larger prospective studies are required to confirm these differences.

Healed or open venous ulcers may be present in up to 1% of Western populations and consume a large amount of healthcare resources. These ulcers are characterized by a chronic inflammatory environment with impaired healing and often require months for closure. The average monthly cost of care for an open ulcer has been estimated to be $4095. The fundamental tenets of ulcer care include adequate compression and maintaining a moist wound environment with an appropriate primary dressing. A number of specialized products including semi-occlusive/occlusive, antimicrobial, and advanced wound matrix dressings are now available. However, there is little data from appropriate clinical studies to suggest significantly improved outcomes with any of these dressings. Data regarding their cost-effectiveness is also limited, often conflicting, and subject to bias. At present, there is little solid evidence to guide the choice of primary dressings and a patient-centered approach focusing on characteristics of both the patient and their ulcer, while paying attention to costs, may be most appropriate.

Post-thrombotic syndrome (PTS) is the most important late complication of acute deep venous thrombosis (DVT), with as many as two-thirds of patients developing symptoms of pain, edema, hyperpigmentation, or ulceration. Although several instruments are available for evaluation of the severity of PTS, including the Villalta-Prandoni scale (VPS) and Venous Clinical Severity Score (VCSS), no studies have yet compared the 2 instruments. The purpose of this study is to compare the 2 instruments as part of a larger randomized controlled study that assessed the impact of graduated compressive stockings in the prevention of PTS.Sixty-nine consecutive patients with acute DVT documented by duplex ultrasonography were randomized to treatment with 30-40 mm Hg graduated compressive stockings (GCS) or no stockings. Patients were followed clinically at months 1, 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24 after the diagnosis of DVT. PTS as defined by the VPS and VCSS were assessed at these follow-up visits. Based upon the VPS, PTS was scored as absent (score3 or 3 without objective criteria), mild to moderate (score ≥3 with 1 objective criteria), or severe (score ≥4). For the VCSS, PTS was considered to be absent (score ≤3), mild to moderate (score 4-7), or severe (score ≥8). The 2 instruments were compared for mild to moderate and severe disease using the Pearson chi-squared test and gamma statistic.Good correlation was detected in the ability of VPS and VCSS instruments to detect mild to moderate disease (gamma statistic = 0.71-0.98; P0.05). For severe disease, a statistically significant correlation was not found in the ability of the 2 instruments to detect disease (gamma statistic = 0.5-0.98; P0.05), especially at 12 and 24 months.Both VPS and the VCSS scoring systems are important tools in the identification and follow-up of PTS. There exists agreement between the 2 instruments for detecting mild to moderate disease. For severe disease however, VCSS may possibly be a more sensitive instrument.

Iliofemoral venous obstruction may arise from either primary compressive lesions or may be secondary to an episode of deep venous thrombosis. Regardless of aetiology, these lesions, either alone or in association with more distal reflux, may be responsible for lower extremity pain, swelling, and ulceration. Conventional surgical procedures for the treatment of iliofemoral venous obstruction have largely been supplanted by endovascular approaches relying on the deployment of venous stents. Large series have reported good technical and clinical results from venous stenting, particularly for primary lesions. However, early stent occlusions and late re-stenosis do occur. Although most of these appear related to technical factors, there is likely a role for pharmacological adjuncts in maintaining stent patency. The use of anticoagulants and antiplatelet agents is largely based on the underlying pathophysiology and extrapolation from arterial interventions, which likely are significantly different with respect to their pathophysiology and natural history. Although lacking substantial evidence demonstrating efficacy, the use of adjunctive antiplatelet agents in stents placed for primary lesions and consideration of anticoagulation for high-risk post-thrombotic lesions appears to be reasonable.

VS between the patients’ symptoms and their clinical signs (P 1⁄4 .175 and r 1⁄4 .219). Conclusions: These results indicate that the VCSS and the C of CEAP may also be useful in the assessment of PTS severity, and that the VFI may provide a clinically meaningful hemodynamic evaluation. These results also confirm that the VS remains the gold standard disease specific assessment in the evaluation of PTS.

Objective The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare the efficacy of three available treatments for acute iliofemoral deep vein thrombosis (DVT): systemic anticoagulation, surgical thrombectomy, and catheter-directed thrombolysis. Methods We searched electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL, Web of Science, and Scopus) and sought additional references from experts. Eligible studies enrolled participants with acute iliofemoral DVT and measured the outcomes of interest. Reviewers working independently in duplicate extracted study characteristics, quality, and outcome data (death, pulmonary embolism, local complications, hemorrhagic complications, postthrombotic syndrome, pain, quality of life, and surrogate markers of venous function such as valve competence and patency). We pooled relative risks (RRs) from each study using the random effects model and estimated the 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Bayesian indirect comparison techniques were used to compare thrombectomy to catheter-directed thrombolysis. Results We found 15 unique studies that fulfilled eligibility criteria. When compared to systemic anticoagulation, thrombectomy was associated with a statistically significant reduction in the risk of developing postthrombotic syndrome (RR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.52-0.87), venous reflux (RR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.46-0.99), and a trend for reduction in the risk of venous obstruction (RR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.60-1.19). When compared to systemic anticoagulation, pharmacologic catheter-directed thrombolysis was associated with statistically significant reduction in the risk of postthrombotic syndrome (RR, 0.19; 95% CI, 0.07-0.48), venous obstruction (RR, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.18-0.37), and a trend for reduction in the risk of venous reflux (RR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.16-1.00). Overall, the quality of evidence was low; downgraded due to the observational nature of the majority of studies, lack of comparability of study cohorts at baseline, loss to follow-up, imprecision, and indirectness of outcomes (surrogacy). There were insufficient data to compare the outcomes of thrombectomy to catheter-directed thrombolysis. Conclusions Low-quality evidence suggests that surgical thrombectomy decreases the incidence of postthrombotic syndrome and venous reflux. Catheter-directed pharmacologic thrombolysis decreases the incidence of postthrombotic syndrome and venous obstruction.

Varicose veins occur in up to one-third of Western populations and are associated with clinical manifestations ranging from asymptomatic, isolated varicose veins (C2 disease) to venous ulceration. While the development of less invasive treatment options, such as endovenous ablation and sclerotherapy, have been well accepted by patients they have led to increased utilization of scarce healthcare resources. While few would argue with the treatment of acute complications such as superficial venous thrombosis and variceal haemorrhage, the role of interventional treatment in the management of lifestyle limiting symptoms and the prevention of disease progression may be debatable. Good-quality evidence does suggest that surgical management of varicose veins is associated with improved quality of life at costs below the thresholds of many Western healthcare systems. However, the progression of isolated C2 disease to advanced chronic venous insufficiency occurs infrequently and the role of treatment to prevent such progression remains undefined at present.

The Society for Vascular Surgery (SVS) and the American Venous Forum (AVF) have developed clinical practice guidelines for the care of patients with varicose veins of the lower limbs and pelvis. The document also includes recommendations on the management of superficial and perforating vein incompetence in patients with associated, more advanced chronic venous diseases (CVDs), including edema, skin changes, or venous ulcers. Recommendations of the Venous Guideline Committee are based on the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system as strong (GRADE 1) if the benefits clearly outweigh the risks, burden, and costs. The suggestions are weak (GRADE 2) if the benefits are closely balanced with risks and burden. The level of available evidence to support the evaluation or treatment can be of high (A), medium (B), or low or very low (C) quality. The key recommendations of these guidelines are: We recommend that in patients with varicose veins or more severe CVD, a complete history and detailed physical examination are complemented by duplex ultrasound scanning of the deep and superficial veins (GRADE 1A). We recommend that the CEAP classification is used for patients with CVD (GRADE 1A) and that the revised Venous Clinical Severity Score is used to assess treatment outcome (GRADE 1B). We suggest compression therapy for patients with symptomatic varicose veins (GRADE 2C) but recommend against compression therapy as the primary treatment if the patient is a candidate for saphenous vein ablation (GRADE 1B). We recommend compression therapy as the primary treatment to aid healing of venous ulceration (GRADE 1B). To decrease the recurrence of venous ulcers, we recommend ablation of the incompetent superficial veins in addition to compression therapy (GRADE 1A). For treatment of the incompetent great saphenous vein (GSV), we recommend endovenous thermal ablation (radiofrequency or laser) rather than high ligation and inversion stripping of the saphenous vein to the level of the knee (GRADE 1B). We recommend phlebectomy or sclerotherapy to treat varicose tributaries (GRADE 1B) and suggest foam sclerotherapy as an option for the treatment of the incompetent saphenous vein (GRADE 2C). We recommend against selective treatment of perforating vein incompetence in patients with simple varicose veins (CEAP class C2; GRADE 1B), but we suggest treatment of pathologic perforating veins (outward flow duration >500 ms, vein diameter >3.5 mm) located underneath healed or active ulcers (CEAP class C5-C6; GRADE 2B). We suggest treatment of pelvic congestion syndrome and pelvic varices with coil embolization, plugs, or transcatheter sclerotherapy, used alone or together (GRADE 2B). (J Vasc Surg 2011;53:2S-48S.)