Comparison of outcomes following polidocanol microfoam and radiofrequency ablation of incompetent thigh great and accessory saphenous veins

Microfoam ablation (MFA) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) are both approved by the Food and Drug Administration for treatment of proximal saphenous truncal veins. The objective of our study was to compare early postoperative outcomes between MFA and RFA following treatment of incompetent thigh saphenous veins.A retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database was conducted of patients who underwent treatment of incompetent great saphenous veins (GSVs) or anterior accessory saphenous veins (AASVs) in the thigh. All the patients underwent duplex ultrasound of the treated leg at 48 to 72 hours postoperatively. Patients were excluded from analysis if concomitant stab phlebectomy was performed. Demographic data, CEAP (clinical, etiologic, anatomic, pathophysiologic) class, venous clinical severity score (VCSS), and adverse events were recorded.Between June 2018 and September 2022, 784 consecutive limbs (RFA, n = 560; MFA, n = 224) underwent venous closure for symptomatic reflux. A total of 200 consecutive thigh GSVs and ASVs treated within the study period using either MFA (n = 100) or RFA (n = 100) were identified. The patients were predominantly women (69%) with a mean age of 64 years. The preoperative CEAP classification was similar between the MFA and RFA groups. The mean preoperative VCSS was 9.4 ± 2.6 for the RFA patients and 9.9 ± 3.3 for the MFA patients. Among the RFA patients, the GSV was treated in 98% and the AASV in 2% compared with the GSV in 83% and the AASV in 17% in the MFA group (P < .001). The mean operative time was 42.4 ± 15.4 minutes in the RFA group and 33.8 ±16.9 minutes in the MFA group (P < .001). The median follow-up was 64 days for the study cohort. The mean postoperative VCSS declined to 7.3 ± 2.1 in the RFA group and 7.8 ± 2.9 in the MFA group. Complete closure occurred in 100% of the limbs after RFA and 90% after MFA (P = .005). Eight veins were partially closed and two remained patent following MFA. The incidence of superficial phlebitis was 6% and 15% (P = .06) after RFA and MFA, respectively. Overall, symptomatic relief was 90% following RFA and 89.5% following MFA. The complete ulcer healing rate for the entire cohort was 77.8%. Deep venous proximal thrombus extension (RFA, 1%; vs MFA, 4%; P = .37) and remote deep vein thrombosis (RFA, 0%; vs MFA, 2%; P = .5) showed a trend toward being higher following MFA but the difference did not reach statistical significance. All were asymptomatic and resolved with short-term anticoagulation therapy.MFA and RFA are both safe and effective for treating incompetent thigh saphenous veins, with excellent symptomatic relief and a low incidence of postprocedure adverse thrombotic events. RFA resulted in improved complete closure rates following initial treatment compared with MFA. The operative times were shorter with MFA. Both modalities can be used for patients with active venous ulcers with good healing rates. Longer term studies are required to characterize the durability of MFA closure for above knee truncal veins.