Adem I Diken, Sertan Özyalçın, İzzet Hafez, Utku Alemdaroğlu, Hüseyin A Tünel, Onur Hanedan
{"title":"射频消融大隐静脉;单极或双极导尿管的选择会影响结果吗?","authors":"Adem I Diken, Sertan Özyalçın, İzzet Hafez, Utku Alemdaroğlu, Hüseyin A Tünel, Onur Hanedan","doi":"10.1177/02683555231174997","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Between November 2019 and November 2021, 121 patients with incompetent varicose veins who were treated either with the F-Care/monopolar (<i>N</i> = 49) or ClosureFast/bipolar (<i>N</i> = 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.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There was no statistically significant difference between the groups regarding demographic parameters, disease severity, and treated veins in preoperative period (<i>p</i> > 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 (<i>p</i> > 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 (<i>p</i> = 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, <i>p</i> = 0.04). Postoperative complications (bruising and skin pigmentation) were slightly higher in the bipolar group (<i>p</i> = 0.02, <i>p</i> = 0.01).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>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.</p>","PeriodicalId":20139,"journal":{"name":"Phlebology","volume":"38 6","pages":"361-369"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Radiofrequency ablation of the great saphenous vein; does the choice of monopolar or bipolar catheters affect outcomes?\",\"authors\":\"Adem I Diken, Sertan Özyalçın, İzzet Hafez, Utku Alemdaroğlu, Hüseyin A Tünel, Onur Hanedan\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/02683555231174997\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Between November 2019 and November 2021, 121 patients with incompetent varicose veins who were treated either with the F-Care/monopolar (<i>N</i> = 49) or ClosureFast/bipolar (<i>N</i> = 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.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There was no statistically significant difference between the groups regarding demographic parameters, disease severity, and treated veins in preoperative period (<i>p</i> > 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 (<i>p</i> > 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 (<i>p</i> = 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, <i>p</i> = 0.04). Postoperative complications (bruising and skin pigmentation) were slightly higher in the bipolar group (<i>p</i> = 0.02, <i>p</i> = 0.01).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>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.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20139,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Phlebology\",\"volume\":\"38 6\",\"pages\":\"361-369\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Phlebology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/02683555231174997\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Phlebology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/02683555231174997","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE","Score":null,"Total":0}
Radiofrequency ablation of the great saphenous vein; does the choice of monopolar or bipolar catheters affect outcomes?
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.
期刊介绍:
The leading scientific journal devoted entirely to venous disease, Phlebology is the official journal of several international societies devoted to the subject. It publishes the results of high quality studies and reviews on any factor that may influence the outcome of patients with venous disease. This journal provides authoritative information about all aspects of diseases of the veins including up to the minute reviews, original articles, and short reports on the latest treatment procedures and patient outcomes to help medical practitioners, allied health professionals and scientists stay up-to-date on developments.
Print ISSN: 0268-3555