Observation of the therapeutic effect of ultrasound-guided microwave ablation for lower extremity varicose veins

doi:10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-5782.2023.03.004

Abstract

Abstract:

Objective

To explore the clinical efficacy of ultrasound-guided microwave ablation for lower extremity varicose veins.

Methods

Sixty patients (a total of 80 limbs) with lower extremity varicose veins were selected, of which 30 cases (40 limbs) treated with traditional surgery (high ligation and stripping) were the control group, and 30 cases (40 limbs) treated with ultrasound-guided microwave ablation were the study group. Clinical efficacy, surgical-related indicators, venous clinical severity score (VCSS), chronic venous insufficiency questionnaire (CIVIQ), treatment satisfaction, and complications were recorded for both groups.

Results

The total effective rate of the study group was significantly higher than that of the control group (96.7% vs 73.3%, P < 0.05). The operation time, hospitalization time and intraoperative blood loss in the study group were significantly shorter/less than those in the control group (all P < 0.05), but the operation cost was higher than that in the control group. Compared with before treatment, the VCSS scores of both groups significantly decreased, and the CIVIQ scores significantly increased 6 months after operation. The AVVSS score of the study group was lower than that of the control group at 3 and 6 months after operation, while the CIVIQ score of the study group was higher than that of the control group (all P < 0.05). The treatment satisfaction rate of the study group was significantly higher than that of the control group (96.7% vs 73.3%, P < 0.05). The incidence of complications in the study group was significantly lower than that in the control group (6.7% vs 33.3%, P < 0.05).

Conclusions

Both ultrasound-guided microwave ablation and traditional surgery had certain therapeutic effect on lower extremity varicose veins, but ultrasound-guided microwave ablation has better efficacy, with advantages of minimally invasive, simple, shorter treatment duration, higher quality of life, and fewer complications.

Key words: Lower extremity varicose veins, Microwave ablation, Traditional surgery, Ultrasound guidance

Yongchuang Zhang, Wei Li, Wenling Man, Po Yang. Observation of the therapeutic effect of ultrasound-guided microwave ablation for lower extremity varicose veins[J]. Chinese Journal of Interventional Radiology(Electronic Edition), 2023, 11(03): 218-222,246.

/ / Recommend

Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX

URL: https://zhjrfsxdzzz.cma-cmc.com.cn/EN/10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-5782.2023.03.004

https://zhjrfsxdzzz.cma-cmc.com.cn/EN/Y2023/V11/I03/218

Figures/Tables 7

References 22

[1]	郭洁, 姚志勇. 超声引导下微波消融术治疗下肢静脉曲张的研究进展[J]. 实用老年医学, 2022, 36(2): 118-120.
[2]	梅家才, 郑月宏. 原发性下肢浅静脉曲张诊治专家共识(2021版)[J]. 血管与腔内血管外科杂志, 2021, 7(7): 762-772.
[3]	何利民, 毛建强, 邢旭峰, 等. 腔内微波联合泡沫硬化剂治疗下肢静脉曲张[J]. 中国中西医结合外科杂志, 2018, 24(2):218-220.
[4]	Yang L, Wang XP, Su WJ, et al. Randomized clinical trial of endovenous microwave ablation combined with high ligation versus conventional surgery for varicose veins[J]. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg, 2013, 46(4): 473-479.
[5]	Tang TY, Chan KKW, Yap CJQ, et al. Pilot single-arm study to investigate the efficacy and safety of endovenous Microwave ablations for treatment of varicose veins in Singapore one-year results of the MAESTRO registry[J]. Phlebology, 2022, 37(10): 709-720.
[6]	Karnabatidis D, Papageorgiou C, Kitrou P, et al. One-year duplex ultrasound-assessed closure outcomes of percutaneous endovenous microwave ablation for the treatment of varicose veins of the lower limbs[J]. Vascular, 2022, 12: 17085381221099115.
[7]	焦亚彬, 耿园园, 杨奋有, 等. 聚桂醇泡沫硬化剂注射与腔内电凝治疗下肢静脉曲张的疗效对比[J]. 中国全科医学, 2016, 19(5): 589-591.
[8]	中国医师协会超声医师分会. 血管超声检查指南[J]. 中华超声影像学杂志, 2009, 18(10): 911-920．
[9]	潘洪涛. 分析超声下大隐静脉高位结扎加微波消融联合泡沫硬化剂治疗对下肢静脉曲张患者手术状况及症状改善的影响作用[J]. 系统医学, 2022, 7(1): 135-138, 155.
[10]	卢裕, 卢钦荣, 刘志浩. 微波消融治疗下肢大隐静脉曲张的临床研究[J]. 江西医药, 2021, 56(1): 52-53, 56.
[11]	张福先, 赵辉. 下肢慢性静脉功能不全的评价方式及临床应用[J]. 中国实用外科杂志, 2015, 35(12): 1267-1271.
[12]	郑月宏, 梅家才, 职康康. 下肢浅静脉曲张诊治微循环专家共识[J]. 中华老年多器官疾病杂志, 2020, 19(1): 1-7.
[13]	郑殿宇, 陈新燕, 冯涛, 等. 透照下动力静脉切除术治疗下肢静脉曲张合并大隐静脉血栓形成的疗效观察[J]. 中华实用诊断与治疗志, 2018, 32(3): 251-254.
[14]	Dwyer HC, Baranowski DC, Mayer PV, et al. LivRelief varicose veins cream in the treatment of chronic venous insufficiency of the lower limbs:a 6-week single arm pilot study[J]. PLoS One，2018, 13(12): e0208954.
[15]	邓昌林, 张书平, 黄超红, 等. 大隐静脉高位结扎联合腔内微波或传统剥脱治疗下肢静脉曲张的疗效评价[J]. 中国微创外科杂志, 2018, 18(12): 1112-1114, 1124.
[16]	Cragg J, Nyamekye I. The recommended goal in the United Kingdom's National Institute for Health and Care excellence clinical guideline 168 for immediate referral of patients with bleeding varicose veins is not being achieved[J]. J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord, 2021, 9(2): 377-382.
[17]	Nesbitt C, Bedenis R, Bhattacharya V, et al. Endovenous ablation (radiofrequency and laser) and foam sclerotherapy versus open surgery for great saphenous vein varices[J]. Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 2014(7): CD005624.
[18]	Brittenden J, Cotton SC, Elders A, et al. A randomized trial comparing treatments for varicose veins[J]. N Engl J Med, 2014, 371(13): 1218-1227.
[19]	van den Bos R, Arends L, Kockaert M, et al. Endovenous therapies of lower extremity varicosities: a meta-analysis[J]. J Vasc Surg, 2009, 49(1): 230-239.
[20]	Paravastu SC, Horne M, Dodd PD. Endovenous ablation therapy (laser or radiofrequency) or foam sclerotherapy versus conventional surgical repair for short saphenous varicose veins[J]. Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 2016, 11(11): CD010878.
[21]	牟彬, 赵罡, 孙闯, 等. 射频消融治疗大隐静脉曲张的近期有效性及安全性[J]. 中国介入影像与治疗学, 2020, 17(2): 84-88.
[22]	Van der Velden SK, Lawaetz M, De Maeseneer MG, et al.Members of the Predictors of Endovenous Thermal Ablation Group. Predictors of recanalization of the great saphenous vein in randomized controlled trials 1 year after endovenous thermal ablation[J]. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg, 2016, 52(2): 234-241.

组别	性别（例，%）		年龄（岁）	病程（年）	CEAP（n，%）
组别	女	男	年龄（岁）	病程（年）	C3	C4	C5	C6
对照组	17（56.7）	13（43.3）	51.67 ± 2.55	10.30 ± 1.90	9（30.0）	11（36.7）	8（26.7）	2（6.7）
研究组	18（60.0）	12（40.0）	51.43 ± 1.91	10.23 ± 2.39	10（33.3）	10（33.3）	7（23.3）	3（10.0）
t/χ²值	0		0.40	0.12	0.37
P值	1		0.69	0.91	0.95

组别	性别（例，%）		年龄（岁）	病程（年）	CEAP（n，%）
组别	女	男	年龄（岁）	病程（年）	C3	C4	C5	C6
对照组	17（56.7）	13（43.3）	51.67 ± 2.55	10.30 ± 1.90	9（30.0）	11（36.7）	8（26.7）	2（6.7）
研究组	18（60.0）	12（40.0）	51.43 ± 1.91	10.23 ± 2.39	10（33.3）	10（33.3）	7（23.3）	3（10.0）
t/χ²值	0		0.40	0.12	0.37
P值	1		0.69	0.91	0.95

组别	显效	有效	无效	总有效（显效+有效）
对照组	13（43.3）	9（30.0）	8（26.7）	22（73.3）
研究组	18（60.0）	11（36.7）	1（3.3）	29（96.7）
χ²值	4.71
P值	0.03

组别	显效	有效	无效	总有效（显效+有效）
对照组	13（43.3）	9（30.0）	8（26.7）	22（73.3）
研究组	18（60.0）	11（36.7）	1（3.3）	29（96.7）
χ²值	4.71
P值	0.03

	手术时间（min）	出血量（mL）	住院时间（d）	总费用（千元）
对照组	67.73 ± 3.83	50.53 ± 4.17	9.90 ± 1.35	15.90 ± 1.35
研究组	57.37 ± 3.82	12.37 ± 1.65	6.50 ± 0.90	25.07 ± 1.17
t值	10.50	46.57	11.49	-28.10
P值	< 0.001	< 0.001	< 0.001	< 0.001

Please choose a citation manager

Content to export