Clinical Analysis of Primary Varicose Vein: review of 209 cases.
- Author:
Yuen Jae LEE
1
;
Chul PARK
;
Jong Seok KIM
;
Han Yong KIM
;
Byung Ha YOO
Author Information
1. Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery,Sungkyunkwan University College of Medicine, Korea. greendok@unitel.co.kr
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Varicose veins
- MeSH:
Ankle;
Classification;
Female;
Follow-Up Studies;
Foot;
Humans;
Hypesthesia;
Leg;
Ligation;
Male;
Precipitating Factors;
Recurrence;
Retrospective Studies;
Sclerotherapy;
Skin;
Telangiectasis;
Varicose Veins*;
Vascular Diseases;
Veins;
Wounds and Injuries
- From:The Korean Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery
2001;34(12):909-916
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
BACKGROUND: Varicose vein is a very common vascular disease and has recently become a matter of concern for thoracic and cardiovascular surgens. MATERIAL AND METHOD: We analyzed 209 cases or 269 feet with varicose vein retrospectively, which had been treated in our hospital from April 1999 to December 2000. RESULT: Male: Female ratio was 1:3(Male: 52 cases, Female: 157 cases), mean age was 42.2+/-9.7 years old, mean duration of varicosities was 12.2+/-9.7 years, and mean follow up was 14.8+/-6.1 months from July 2001. Most common symptom was leg pain(122 cases, 58.4%). Long standing job(44 cases), pregnancy(37 cases), and family history related to varicose vein came to 79.9% as the major predisposing or precipitating factors. Anatomic classifications of main lesion were GSV (greater saphenous vein,126 cases),LSV(lesser saphenous vein,18 cases), and reticular veins and telangiectasias(65 cases). Main treatments were stripping of GSV, stab avulsion, ligation of saphenofemoral junction, sclerotherapy, and conservative treatment. Comparing A group (stripping of GSV) with B group(sclerotherapy of GSV), A group had more complications than B group; however, A group had less recurrences than B group(p<0.05). Comparing C group(stab avulsion of LSV) with D group(sclerotherapy of LSV), there were 2 cases of recurrence in D group; however, there were no statistical differences between the two groups in complication and recurrence(p>0.05). Comparing B group(sclerotherapy of GSV) with E group(sclerotherapy of reticular vein and telangiectasia), there were no differences in complication; however, B group had more recurrences than E group. Post-stripping complications were ankle numbness and tingling(2 cases), ankle pain(2 cases),ankle swelling(2 cases), and wound pain(1 case). Postsclerotherapy complications were thrombophlebitis(1 case) and skin ulcer(1 case). CONCLUSION: Sclerotherapy for varicose vein involving GSV had more recurrences than stripping for lesions involving GSV. Sclerotherapy for reticular vein and telangiectasia had less recurrences than sclerotherapy for lesion involving GSV. Sclerotherapy is a very convenient method without operation and admission, thus further research is demanded in case of varicose vein involving GSV.
