Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
World Journal of Surgery
Published in: World Journal of Surgery 11/2007

Open Access 01-11-2007

Conventional Versus Invaginated Stripping of the Great Saphenous Vein: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Controlled Clinical Trial

Authors: Marc R. Scheltinga, Edwin R. Wijburg, Bram J. Keulers, Karin E. de Kroon

Published in: World Journal of Surgery | Issue 11/2007

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

An invaginated strip of the great saphenous vein (GSV) may be associated with diminished blood loss and less discomfort compared to conventional stripping in patients with unilateral primary GSV varicosis.

Methods

Ninety-two patients were randomized for conventional (CON) or invaginated (INVAG) stripping and were followed for 26 weeks postoperatively.

Results

Both groups (n = 46) were well balanced for age, gender distribution, and body mass index. The CON group lost twice as much blood compared to the INVAG group (CON: 28 ± 4 g, INVAG: 15 ± 2 g, p < 0.001). Infragenual incision length following a conventional strip was twice as long (CON: 16 ± 1 mm, INVAG: 8 ± 1 mm, p < 0.001). Pain as measured with a visual analog scale (minimal 0, max 10) decreased in both groups in a similar fashion from 3.2 ± 0.3 preoperatively to 0.6 ± 0.2 after 26 weeks (p < 0.001). Saphenous nerve damage after one month was observed in four CON patients compared to no patients following invagination. Return to work was not different (CON: 13 ± 2 days, INVAG: 11 ± 2 days).

Conclusion

Invagination of the GSV in uncomplicated primary varicosis may be associated with less surgical trauma compared to a conventional stripping technique.
Literature
1.
Michaels JA, Brazier JE, Campbell WB, et al. (2005) Randomized clinical trial comparing surgery with conservative treatment for uncomplicated varicose veins. Br J Surg 93:175–181CrossRef
2.
de Medeiros CA, Luccas GC (2005) Comparison of endovenous treatment with an 810 nm laser versus conventional stripping of the great saphenous vein in patients with primary varicose veins. Dermatol Surg 31(12):1685–1694PubMedCrossRef
3.
Bergan J, Pascarella L, Mekenas L (2006) Venous disorders: treatment with sclerosant foam. J Cardiovasc Surg (Torino) 47(1):9–18
4.
Schouten R, Mollen RM, Kuijpers HC (2006) A comparison between cryosurgery and conventional stripping in varicose vein surgery: perioperative features and complications. Ann Vasc Surg 20(3):306–311PubMedCrossRef
5.
Sybrandy JE, Wittens CHA (2002) Initial experience in endovenous treatment of saphenous vein reflux. J Vasc Surg 36:1207–1212PubMedCrossRef
6.
Babcock WW (1907) A new operation for the extirpation of varicose veins of the leg. N Y Med J 86:153–156
7.
Nisar A, Shabbir J, Tubassam MA, et al. (2006) Local anaesthetic flush reduces postoperative pain and haematoma formation after great saphenous vein stripping-a randomised controlled trial. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 31(3):325–331PubMedCrossRef
8.
Winterborn RJ, Earnshaw JJ (2006) Crossectomy and great saphenous vein stripping. J Cardiovasc Surg (Torino) 47(1):19–33
9.
Holme JB, Skajaa K, Holme K (1990) Incidence of lesions of the saphenous nerve after partial or complete stripping of the long saphenous vein. Acta Chir Scand 156(2):145–148PubMed
10.
Ramasastry SS, Dick GO, Futrell JW (1987) Anatomy of the saphenous nerve: relevance to saphenous vein stripping. Am Surg 53(5):274–277PubMed
11.
Staelens I, Van Der Stricht J (1992) Complication rate of long stripping of the greater saphenous vein. Phlebology 7:67–70
12.
Lacroix H, Nevelsteen A, Suy R (1999) Invaginating versus classic stripping of the long saphenous vein. A randomized prospective study. Acta Chir Belg 99(1):22–25PubMed
13.
Durkin MT, Turton EP, Scott DJ, et al. (1999) A prospective randomised trial of PIN versus conventional stripping in varicose vein surgery. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 81(3):171–174PubMed
14.
Eklof B, Rutherford RB, Bergan JJ, et al. (2004) American Venous Forum International Ad Hoc Committee for Revision of the CEAP Classification. Revision of the CEAP classification for chronic venous disorders: consensus statement. J Vasc Surg 40(6):1248–1252PubMedCrossRef
15.
Fullarton GM, Calvert MH (1987) Intraluminal long saphenous vein stripping: A technique minimizing perivenous tissue trauma. Br J Surg 74:255PubMedCrossRef
16.
Sarin S, Scurr J, Coleridge Smith P (1992) Assessment of stripping the long saphenous vein in the treatment of primary varicose veins. Br J Surg 79:889–893PubMedCrossRef
17.
Keller W (1905) A new method of extirpating the internal saphenous and similar veins in varicose conditions: a preliminary report. N Y Med J 82:385
18.
Goren G, Yellin AE (1994) Invaginated axial saphenectomy by a semirigid stripper: Perforate-invaginate stripping. J Vasc Surg 20:970–977PubMed
19.
Goren G, Yellin AE (1995) Minimally invasive surgery for primary varicose veins: Limited invaginal axial stripping and tributary (hook) stab avulsion. Ann Vasc Surg 9(4):401–414PubMedCrossRef
20.
Bearn P, Fox JA (1993) A modified technique for stripping of the long saphenous vein. Phlebology 8:32–33
21.
Ouvry PA (1989) Les strippings par invagination sur meches calibrees. Phlebologie 4:599–604
22.
Van der Stricht J (1963) Saphenectomie par invagination sur fil. Presse Med 71:1081–1082
23.
Sorrentino P, Renier M, Coppa F, et al. (2003) How to prevent saphenous nerve injury. A personal modified technique for the stripping of the long saphenous vein. Minerva Chir 58(1):123–128PubMed
24.
Sperling M, Lacativa A (1985) Die Invaginationsextraction – Eine modifizierung der Babcock’schen Varicenoperation. Chirurg 56:90–94PubMed
25.
Conrad P, Gassner P (1996) Invagination stripping of the long and short saphenous vein using the pin stripper. Aust N Z J Surg 66:394–396PubMed
26.
Oesch A (1993) Pin-stripping: A novel method of atraumatic stripping. Phlebology 8:171–173
27.
Dieudonne G (1988) Les saphenectomies par invagination sur fil sous anesthesie locale. Phlebologie 41(2):309–320PubMed
28.
Fischer R (1993) Zur Technik des invertierenden Strippens in der Varizenchirurgie. VASA 22(4):316–319PubMed
29.
Bergan JJ (2000) Varicose veins: Treatment by surgery and sclerotherapy. In: Rutherford RB (ed), Vascular Surgery, 5th edn. Philadelphia, WB Saunders, pp 2012–2013
30.
Butler CM, Coleridge Smith PD, Scurr JH (1995) Inverting stripping versus conventional stripping of the long saphenous vein. Phlebology 10:128
31.
Kent PJ, Maughan J, Burniston M, et al. (1999) Perforation-invagination (PIN) stripping of the long saphenous vein reduces thigh haematoma formation in varicose vein surgery. Phlebology 14:43–47CrossRef
32.
Corder AP, Schache DJ, Farquharson SM, et al. (1991) Wound infection following high saphenous ligation. A trial comparing two skin closure techniques: subcuticular polyglycolic acid and interrupted monofilament nylon mattress sutures. J R Coll Surg Edinb 36(2):100–102PubMed
33.
Morrison C, Dalsing MC (2003) Signs and symptoms of saphenous nerve injury after greater saphenous vein stripping: Prevalence, severity and relevance for modern practice. J Vasc Surg 38:886–890PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Conventional Versus Invaginated Stripping of the Great Saphenous Vein: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Controlled Clinical Trial
Authors
Marc R. Scheltinga
Edwin R. Wijburg
Bram J. Keulers
Karin E. de Kroon
Publication date
01-11-2007
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
World Journal of Surgery / Issue 11/2007
Print ISSN: 0364-2313
Electronic ISSN: 1432-2323
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-007-9211-3

Other articles of this Issue 11/2007

World Journal of Surgery 11/2007 Go to the issue

OriginalPaper

Emergency Left Colon Resection for Acute Perforation. Primary Anastomosis or Hartmann’s Procedure? A Case-matched Control Study

OriginalPaper

Extranodal Spreading of Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma: Clinicopathological Characteristics and Prognostic Impact

Invited Commentary

Radiofrequency-assisted Hepatectomy May Induce Severe Postoperative Liver Damage

OriginalPaper

Aortopexy in Infants and Children—Long-term Follow-up in Twenty Patients

OriginalPaper

Randomized Clinical Trial of the Effects of Perioperative Use of Immune-enhancing Enteral Formula on Metabolic and Immunological Status in Patients Undergoing Esophagectomy

Invited Commentary

Ethics of Surgical Training in Developing Countries