Venous stenting versus venous ablation

BackgroundThe minimally invasive procedures of venous ablation and iliac vein stenting are evolving treatment options for venous insufficiency. Yet, there are no studies directly comparing the outcome of these procedures. We performed a survey on patients who had both procedures, to determine if either procedure helped more and if there is any other clinical factor related to the outcome.MethodWe collected data between Jan 2012 and Feb 2019 from 726 patients who failed to improve swelling after conservative management. The patients underwent iliac vein stenting and vein ablations. We recorded patient assessment of the leg immediately after completion of both procedures. Follow-up was performed using in-person questionnaires by asking if improvement in lower extremity swelling occurred and if so, which procedure helped more.ResultsOf the 726 patients who underwent endovenous closure and iliac vein stent placement, 254 (35%) were males. The average age of the patients was 70 (±13.7 SD, range 29-103) years. The presenting symptom (C of CEAP classification) of lower extremity limb venous disease was 34.8%, 44.6%, 5.6%, and 15% for C3-C6, respectively. Patients were asked about swelling, and they stated: swelling is better (605, 83.3%), swelling is not better (118, 16.3%), and not sure if there is any improvement in swelling (3, 0.4%). Patients stated the following completion of both procedures: both procedures equally helped (129, 18%), iliac vein stent superior (167, 23%), endovenous ablation superior (177, 24%), neither helped (112, 16%), and not sure which procedure helped more (141, 19%). After ANOVA, we concluded that older patients (average = 72.5 years) were more often not sure which procedure helped more (<i>p</i> = .024), and younger patients (average = 68.4 years) stated that endovenous ablation helped more (<i>p</i> = .014). There were no significant differences between the groups regarding gender (<i>p</i> = .9), laterality (<i>p</i> = .33), or presenting symptoms scores (<i>p</i> = .9). There was no statistical relationship between the procedure that was performed first and the procedure that helped more (<i>p</i> = 0.095).ConclusionIn this qualitative assessment, preliminary data suggest that the comparative role of iliac vein stent versus endovenous ablation warrants further study. The data were broadly distributed, and neither procedure was superior. In addition, 16% of the patients stated that neither procedure helped. The age of patients may also play a role in their procedure preferences and their subjective assessment for improvement.