Effect of junctional reflux on the venous clinical severity score in patients with insufficiency of the great saphenous vein (JURY study)

Chandu Vemuri, Kathleen D. Gibson, Peter J. Pappas, Mikel Sadek, Windsor Ting, Andrea T. Obi, Nicolas J. Mouawad, Yana Etkin, Antonios P. Gasparis, Tara McDonald, Shalini Sahoo, John D. Sorkin, Brajesh K. Lal

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

2 Scopus citations

Abstract

Objective: Effective treatment options are available for chronic venous insufficiency associated with superficial venous reflux. Although many patients with C2 and C3 disease based on the CEAP (Clinical-Etiological-Anatomical-Pathophysiological) classification have combined great saphenous vein (GSV) and saphenofemoral junction (SFJ) reflux, some may not have concomitant SFJ reflux. Several payors have determined that symptom severity in patients without SFJ reflux does not warrant treatment. In patients planned for venous ablation, we tested whether Venous Clinical Severity Scores (VCSS) are equivalent in those with GSV reflux alone compared with those with both GSV and SFJ reflux. Methods: This cross-sectional study was conducted at 10 centers. Inclusion criteria were: candidate for endovenous ablation as determined by treating physician; 18 to 80 years of age; GSV reflux with or without SFJ reflux on ultrasound; and C2 or C3 disease. Exclusion criteria were prior deep vein thrombosis; prior vein ablation on the index limb; ilio-caval obstruction; and renal, hepatic, or heart failure requiring prior hospitalization. An a priori sample size was calculated. We used multiple linear regression (adjusted for patient characteristics) to compare differences in VCSS scores of the two groups at baseline, and to test whether scores were equivalent using a priori equivalence boundaries of +1 and −1. In secondary analyses, we tested differences in VCSS scores in patients with C2 and C3 disease separately. Results: A total of 352 patients were enrolled; 64.2% (n = 226) had SFJ reflux, and 35.8% (n = 126) did not. The two groups did not differ by major clinical characteristics. The mean age of the cohort was 53.9 ± 14.3 years; women comprised 74.2%; White patients 85.8%; and body mass index was 27.8 ± 6.1 kg/m2. The VCSS scores in patients with and without SFJ reflux were found to be equivalent; SFJ reflux was not a significant predictor of VCSS score; and mean VCSS scores did not differ significantly (6.4 vs 6.6, respectively, P = .40). In secondary subset analyses, VCSS scores were equivalent between C2 patients with and without SFJ reflux, and VCSS scores of C3 patients with SFJ reflux were lower than those without SFJ reflux. Conclusions: Symptom severity is equivalent in patients with GSV reflux with or without SFJ reflux. The absence of SFJ reflux alone should not determine the treatment paradigm in patients with symptomatic chronic venous insufficiency. Patients with GSV reflux who meet clinical criteria for treatment should have equivalent treatment regardless of whether or not they have SFJ reflux.

Original languageEnglish
Article number101700
JournalJournal of Vascular Surgery: Venous and Lymphatic Disorders
Volume12
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 2024
Externally publishedYes

Keywords

  • Ablation
  • Great saphenous vein
  • Reflux
  • Saphenofemoral junction
  • Venous

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Effect of junctional reflux on the venous clinical severity score in patients with insufficiency of the great saphenous vein (JURY study)'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this