Phlebology > Volume 24, Number 1 > Pp. 8-16

This Article Figures Only Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Luebke, T Articles by Brunkwall, J Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Social Bookmarking                      What's this?

Review Article

Meta-analysis of subfascial endoscopic perforator vein surgery (SEPS) for chronic venous insufficiency

T Luebke and J Brunkwall 

Department of Vascular Surgery, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany

Correspondence: J Brunkwall MD PhD, Department of Vascular Surgery, University of Cologne, Joseph-Stelzmann-Straße 9, 50924 Cologne, Germany. Email: jan.brunkwall{at}uk-koeln.de

Objectives: The degree of benefits and risks, and the role of subfascial endoscopic perforator vein surgery (SEPS) in the management for chronic venous insufficiency (CVI) remains uncertain.

Methods: A multiple health database search was performed including Medline, Embase, Ovid, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Cochrane Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness, on all studies published between 1985 and 2008 that reported on health outcomes in patients with CVI treated with SEPS and comparing this therapy with the conventional Linton procedure. Three studies, which compared SEPS with conventional surgery, were included in the present meta-analysis.

Results: Between SEPS and Linton groups, there was a significant lower rate of wound infections for SEPS (odds ratio [OR] 0.06 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.02 to 0.25]) and a significantly reduced hospital stay for SEPS (OR –8.96 [95% CI –11.62 to –6.30]). In addition, SEPS was associated with a significant reduced rate of recurrent ulcers (mean follow-up 21 months) (OR 0.15 [95% CI 0.04–0.62]).

There was no significant difference between the groups in the following dimensions: rate of hospital re-admission (OR 0.21 [95% CI 0.03 –1.31]), death at six months (OR 3.00 [95% CI 0.11–78.27]), ulcer healing rate at four months (OR 0.44 [95% CI 0.09–2.12]), and the rate of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) (OR 0.35 [95% CI 0.01–8.85]).

Conclusion: From the level of evidence available by now it seems that SEPS, used as a part of a treatment regimen for severe CVI, benefits most patients in the short term regarding ulcer healing and the prevention of ulcer recurrence. It can be safely performed with less early postoperative complications compared with the Linton procedure. However, further prospective randomized trials are required to define the long-term benefits of SEPS.

Key Words: venous insufficiency • subfascial endoscopic perforator vein surgery (SEPS) • Linton procedure

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?