Comparison of the efficacy of two different treatments for venous malformation with rapid drainage
- Shiwei Yang
- Ping Liu
- Long Sun
- Chunfang Hu
- Yingxue Hao
Affiliations: Department of Vascular Surgery, First Affiliated Hospital of Third Military Medical University (Army Medical University), Chongqing 400038, P.R. China
- Published online on: September 15, 2020 https://doi.org/10.3892/wasj.2020.67
Copyright: © Yang
et al. This is an open access article distributed under the
terms of Creative
Commons Attribution License.
Views: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )
Total PDF Downloads: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )
This article is mentioned in:
Venous malformation with rapid drainage is a common venous system disease, which is mainly manifested by the rapid return of blood to the lungs and heart with less oxygen. The present study aimed to examine the effects of digital subtraction angiography (DSA)‑assisted interventional therapy and radiofrequency therapy assisted by ultrasound on venous malformation and to provide clinical evidence of the treatment efficacy for the selection of the optimal strategy. From September, 2018 to July, 2019, 41 patients with types II, III and IV venous malformations at the department of vascular surgery at the authors' institution were enrolled in the present retrospective study. Two different treatments were used: Coil embolization with sclerosing agent under DSA, and radiofrequency ablation with sclerosing agent under ultrasound guidance. The follow‑up of the patients was conducted according to an established plan. The duration of the surgery, the duration of hospitalization, treatment cost, treatment efficacy and other clinical indicators were recorded in detail and comparatively analyzed. In the comparison of background characteristics and surgical information of the 2 groups of patients, significant differences were observed in the duration of surgery (P<0.001), post‑operative hospital duration (P<0.001), treatment costs (P<0.001) and treatment efficacy between the 2 treatment methods (P=0.033) (all P‑values were <0.05). On the whole, the present study demonstrates that DSA contrast‑enhanced coil packing and sclerotherapy are associated with a longer duration of surgery, a more extended duration of hospitalization and a higher treatment cost compared with ultrasound‑guided radiofrequency therapy; however, the treatment efficacy of DSA contrast‑enhanced coil packing and sclerotherapy may be more advanced than that of ultrasound‑guided radiofrequency ablation.