Iliac vein stenting outcomes for patients with superficial venous insufficiency concurrent with deep venous disease

Vikram Vasan, Halbert Bai, Jenny Chen, Jason Storch, Jinseo Kim, Elyssa Dionne, Logan D. Cho, Christopher Gonzalez, Peter V. Cooke, Yeju Kang, Ajit Rao, Windsor Ting

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

4 Scopus citations

Abstract

Objective: Many patients will present with chronic proximal venous outflow obstruction (PVOO) and superficial venous insufficiency (SVI) at the time of iliac vein stenting. In the present study, we aimed to determine whether differences in outcomes were present for patients receiving an iliac vein stent according to whether concurrent SVI was present. Methods: A registry of 553 patients who had undergone iliac vein stent placement for chronic PVOO from 2011 to 2021 was retrospectively analyzed. Two groups of patients were followed for ≤6 years after initial vein stent placement: group 1 (n = 178; 32.2%) had not had SVI before or after stent placement and group 2 (n = 375; 67.8%) had had SVI at initial iliac vein stent procedure. The patients’ symptoms were evaluated using the venous clinical severity score (VCSS). Postoperative procedures after initial stent placement were recorded. Postoperative procedures included any operation performed after the index iliac vein stent procedure. Endovenous thermal ablation was classified as a minor postoperative procedure, and any intervention with venography was classified as a major postoperative reintervention. Multivariate regression models were used to determine the odds of a major reintervention or minor procedure postoperatively. Results: Across the two groups, the mean age (group 1, 65.3 years; group 2, 59.9 years; P <.001), body mass index (27.6 vs 26.1 kg/m2; P =.004), diabetes (32.6% vs 17.6%; P <.001), arterial hypertension (68.5% vs 42.1%; P <.001), and coronary artery disease (16.9% vs 9.6%; P =.048) differed significantly. The time to follow-up was similar between the two groups (P =.915). Longitudinally, both groups had had similar improvements in the composite VCSSs. After multivariable adjustment, group 2 was more likely than group 1 (odds ratio, 5.26; 95% confidence interval, 3.33-8.59; P <.001) to have required a postoperative minor procedure, but not a major reintervention. Group 2 had also averaged a shorter interval from the index procedure to a postoperative procedure than group 1 (525.7 days vs 258.1 days; P <.001). Conclusions: Compared with patients without SVI, those with SVI and chronic PVOO were younger, had had fewer comorbidities, and fared similarly in the change in the composite VCSSs but were more likely to have required a minor procedure and less likely to have required a major reintervention after the index iliac vein stent procedure.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1215-1220.e1
JournalJournal of Vascular Surgery: Venous and Lymphatic Disorders
Volume10
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - Nov 2022

Keywords

  • Iliac vein stent
  • Outcomes
  • Proximal venous outflow obstruction
  • Reintervention
  • Superficial venous insufficiency

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Iliac vein stenting outcomes for patients with superficial venous insufficiency concurrent with deep venous disease'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this