Validation of a New Duplex Derived Haemodynamic Effectiveness Score, the Saphenous Treatment Score, in Quantifying Varicose Vein Treatments

AbstractObjectivesTo evaluate a duplex-derived score for varicose vein treatments using numerical values of haemodynamic effectiveness.DesignThe saphenous treatment score (STS) was developed prospectively to compare the effect of endovenous treatments on reflux within saphenous segments.PatientsSixty-six patients were randomised to endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) or ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy (UGFS) to the great saphenous vein (GSV).MethodsAssessments included the Aberdeen varicose vein severity score (AVVSS), the venous clinical severity score (VCSS), the venous filling index (VFI) and the STS.ResultsA mean STS of 5.70 decreased to 3.30, P < .0005, post-treatment. The median (IQR) AVVSS, VCSS and VFI (ml/sec) decreased from 21.52(15.48) to 18.86(11.27), P = .14, from 6(4) to 3(4), P < .0005 and from 7.1(6.9) to 1.9(.9) P < .0005, respectively. In 15 patients requiring additional UGFS the mean STS values decreased from 5.8 to 4.13 and then to 2.6 P < .0005, respectively. The individual above and below knee mean treatment differences in STS on 38 EVLA and 28 UGFS patients were 1.92 and .87 (EVLA) compared to 1.57and .29 (UGFS) P = .001, respectively.ConclusionsThe STS has been shown to grade the haemodynamic effects of different treatments as well as ongoing treatments on the GSV

Immediate Hemodynamic Effect of the Additional Use of the SCD EXPRESS™ Compression System in Patients with Venous Ulcers Treated with the Four-layer Compression Bandaging System

ObjectivesTo test the hypothesis that the SCD EXPRESS™ intermittent pneumatic compression applied in combination with a four-layer bandage in patients with venous ulcers increases popliteal vein volume flow and velocity.DesignTwenty limbs of 18 patients with venous leg ulcers were studied, median age 76 years. The Total Volume Flow (TVF) and the Peak Systolic Velocity (PSV) were recorded in the popliteal vein using duplex ultrasonography. Measurements were made (i) without bandage, (ii) with four layer bandage and (iii) following the application of the SCD Compression System on top of a four-layer bandage for at least 15 minutes.ResultsThe median VCSS was 17 (range, 12–22) while the median VSDS for reflux was 4.5 (range, 1–7.5). The median TVF was 71mL/min (inter-quartile range 57–101) without bandage, 112 (IQR 89–148) with four-layer bandage and 291 (IQR 241–392) with the addition of the SCD System (P<.001, Wilcoxon signed ranks test). The median PSV was 8.4cm/sec (IQR 6.8–14) without bandage, 13 (9.0–19) with four-layer bandage and 27 (21–31) with the addition of the SCD System (P<.001, Wilcoxon signed ranks test). Both TVF and PSV increased slightly with the addition of the four-layer bandage. However, with the addition of the SCD System these parameters increased three fold.ConclusionsThe SCD EXPRESS Compression System accelerates venous flow in the legs of patients with venous ulcers already treated with a four-layer bandage. The combination of four-layer compression with the SCD System on healing venous ulcers needs to be tested by a clinical effectiveness study

Systematic review and meta-analysis of the diagnostic accuracy of ultrasonography for deep vein thrombosis

Background Ultrasound (US) has largely replaced contrast venography as the definitive diagnostic test for deep vein thrombosis (DVT). We aimed to derive a definitive estimate of the diagnostic accuracy of US for clinically suspected DVT and identify study-level factors that might predict accuracy. Methods We undertook a systematic review, meta-analysis and meta-regression of diagnostic cohort studies that compared US to contrast venography in patients with suspected DVT. We searched Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, Database of Reviews of Effectiveness, the ACP Journal Club, and citation lists (1966 to April 2004). Random effects meta-analysis was used to derive pooled estimates of sensitivity and specificity. Random effects meta-regression was used to identify study-level covariates that predicted diagnostic performance. Results We identified 100 cohorts comparing US to venography in patients with suspected DVT. Overall sensitivity for proximal DVT (95% confidence interval) was 94.2% (93.2 to 95.0), for distal DVT was 63.5% (59.8 to 67.0), and specificity was 93.8% (93.1 to 94.4). Duplex US had pooled sensitivity of 96.5% (95.1 to 97.6) for proximal DVT, 71.2% (64.6 to 77.2) for distal DVT and specificity of 94.0% (92.8 to 95.1). Triplex US had pooled sensitivity of 96.4% (94.4 to 97.1%) for proximal DVT, 75.2% (67.7 to 81.6) for distal DVT and specificity of 94.3% (92.5 to 95.8). Compression US alone had pooled sensitivity of 93.8 % (92.0 to 95.3%) for proximal DVT, 56.8% (49.0 to 66.4) for distal DVT and specificity of 97.8% (97.0 to 98.4). Sensitivity was higher in more recently published studies and in cohorts with higher prevalence of DVT and more proximal DVT, and was lower in cohorts that reported interpretation by a radiologist. Specificity was higher in cohorts that excluded patients with previous DVT. No studies were identified that compared repeat US to venography in all patients. Repeat US appears to have a positive yield of 1.3%, with 89% of these being confirmed by venography. Conclusion Combined colour-doppler US techniques have optimal sensitivity, while compression US has optimal specificity for DVT. However, all estimates are subject to substantial unexplained heterogeneity. The role of repeat scanning is very uncertain and based upon limited data