Objective: Edema of the lower extremities can occur in various situations. We aim to identify the causes of edema commonly encountered in clinical practice and determine the role of vascular specialists in lower extremity edema.
Methods: From January 1, 2019, to September 30, 2019, 112 medical records were reviewed retrospectively. We referred to the algorithm for leg edema. We proposed a final diagnosis based on the medical history, physical examination, laboratory tests, imaging studies, and consultation with other specialists.
Results: Among the 112 patients, 42 (37.5%) patients were diagnosed with chronic vascular disease. Overall, 28 (25%) patients had no clearly identified causes and were considered idiopathic. Another 28 (25%) patients had musculoskeletal disorders and 10 (2.9%) patients had medical disease. There were 4 isolated cases of dermatitis, insect bites, pregnancy, and morbid obesity. 24 cases (21.4%) of the 112 patients were diagnosed with lower-extremity varicose veins, with 17 (15.2%) patients showing reflux in the saphenous vein on Doppler ultrasound.
Conclusion: In this study, various leg edema indicated the need for interdisciplinary consultations and differential diagnoses. Chronic venous disease treatment does not seem to have an absolute significance in lower extremity edema. But, vascular specialists play the role of a control tower in diagnosing lower extremity edema.

In diagnosing varicose veins, accurate ultrasound examinations and meticulous recording of findings are crucial, as they play a significant role in determining treatment methods. Therefore, the Korean Society of Phlebology, in collaboration with related societies, has developed guidelines for the ultrasound diagnosis of varicose veins, including standard recommendations for documenting examination records. After examining varicose veins, it is mandatory to record in writing the name of the blood vessel that was measured. For penetrating veins, it is also necessary to precisely record both the size and location. Additionally, during a provocation test involving compression, the augmented waveform and the regurgitation waveform must be documented so that they are distinctly visible in opposite directions around the baseline. Lastly, the reflux time should be specified in seconds or milliseconds.

Objective: Most causes of lower extremity varicose veins are associated with saphenous veins. However, there are several unusual causes of varicose veins that are not related to the saphenous veins. This study reports rare cases of varicose veins originating from intraosseous perforating vein incompetence. The purpose of this study is to examine the clinical manifestations, diagnostic methods, and appropriate treatments.
Methods: A total of 5,481 patients with lower extremity varicose veins visited our clinic from June 2016 to October 2021. Among them, seven patients were identified to have intraosseous perforating vein incompetence. Color Doppler ultrasound was performed to diagnose reflux at the site of the perforating vein through the tibial cortex.
Results: Varicose veins were observed in the pretibial area, and they were connected to the tibial perforating vein with venous reflux. The patients experienced common symptoms associated with lower extremity varicose veins, such as heaviness, cramping, tingling, swelling and discomfort. However, in our cases, there were no localized symptoms specifically related to the tibia area. The surgical procedure performed involved perforating vein ligation and phlebectomy with an incision under local anesthesia.
Conclusion: Intraosseous perforating vein incompetence is a very rare cause of pretibial varices, primarily observed on the anteromedial side of the mid-shaft of the tibia. It is easily overlooked due to its rarity. However, with sufficient knowledge, intraosseous perforating vein incompetence can be accurately diagnosed using Doppler ultrasound alone, and it can be easily treated through perforating vein ligation and phlebectomy.

Non-saphenous veins refer to veins other than the great saphenous vein or small saphenous vein. Emerging evidence suggests that non-saphenous vein reflux may be more prevalent than previously thought, occurring in 9∼35% of patients with chronic venous disease. We purposed to review the anatomical distribution, diagnostic methods, and treatment options for non-saphenous vein reflux and the importance of differentiating it from saphenous vein reflux in clinical practice. Various types of non-saphenous vein reflux are discussed, including posterolateral thigh perforator vein reflux, vulvar vein reflux, gluteal vein reflux, sciatic nerve/tibial nerve vein reflux, popliteal fossa vein reflux, and knee perforator vein reflux. Individualized treatment approaches are recommended, with sclerotherapy and phlebectomy being common options. Increasing awareness and understanding of non-saphenous vein reflux can lead to improved diagnosis, management, and outcomes for patients with venous disease.

The pain associated with such issues with venous blood flow is expressed in various ways. Such pain in venous insufficiency is voiced as the main reason for decreased quality of life in patients. However, the exact cause of venous pain, which appears in various aspects, is unknown. Therefore, It is not easy to understanding venous pain yet. More research on this is expected to be needed in the future.

Iliofemoral venous outflow obstruction, arising from nonthrombotic iliac vein lesions (NIVLs) or post-thrombotic disease (PTs), is a frequent culprit behind chronic venous signs and symptoms. In response, the adoption of deep venous stenting has gained traction, demonstrating commendable technical success and acceptable complication rates in the management of both acute and chronic venous obstruction. However, the focus on venous stent failure has intensified due to concerns related to in-stent restenosis or thrombosis. Such complications elevate the risks of symptom recurrence and thrombosis relapse, necessitating a judicious approach. The identified contributors to venous stent failure encompass multifaceted factors, including insufficient coverage of the affected area, inadequate vein inflow, inappropriate stent sizing, suboptimal drug therapy, patient non-compliance, stent migration, or fracture. This paper provides a comprehensive exploration of these factors associated with venous stent failure, shedding light on the complexities surrounding the efficacy and longevity of deep venous stenting in the context of iliofemoral venous outflow obstruction.

Objective: Radiofrequency thermal ablation is an effective and safe treatment for varicose veins. Existing radiofrequency thermal ablation devices in Korea detect the temperature of the catheter to adjust the radiofrequency output. In contrast, VENISTAR^Ⓡ, a new radiofrequency thermal ablation device, detects the resistance of the vein wall during ablation to adjust the radiofrequency output. Herein, the safety and effects of VENISTAR^Ⓡ were assessed.
Methods: A total of 60 patients with varicose veins who were treated using VENISTAR^Ⓡ from January 2021 to September 2022 at our institution were retrospectively analyzed. In this study, 60 patients (41 males and 19 females) were treated with VENISTAR^Ⓡ.
Results: The mean age was 46.2±11.7 years for males and 52.7±14.2 years for females. CEAP classification was as follows: 28, 26, 4, and 2 patients had C2, C3, C4a, and C4c, respectively. A total of 89 truncal veins were treated, including 79 cases of the great saphenous vein and 10 cases of the small saphenous vein. The mean follow-up period was 190±130 days, and the success rate of treatment with VENISTAR^Ⓡ was 97.7%. Complications included 20 cases of bruising, 3 cases of phlebitis, 2 cases of recanalization, and 1 case of neovascularization.
Conclusion: VENISTAR^Ⓡ, the new radiofrequency thermal ablation device, was effective and safe for treatment of varicose veins. However, as the follow up duration of the participants was relatively short, generalization of the findings was limited. In the future, long-term studies must be conducted.

Chronic venous disease is a progressive condition, and long-term follow-up is essential for a comprehensive understanding. In clinical practice, conducting extended follow-ups of patients is realistically challenging, and there is still much to learn about the clinical course of varicose veins. Given the gradual progression of chronic venous disease, gaining a precise understanding is crucial for guiding patient treatment. Chronic venous disease is progressive, and early interventions such as lifestyle modifications, medication, compression stockings, or surgery help slow and prevent the progression of the disease. Our objective is to review existing long-term follow-up studies to enhance the treatment approach for patients with varicose veins.

Objective: Endovenous ablation can sometimes be challenged by the anatomical factors of the great saphenous vein (GSV). We aimed to evaluate the distribution of reflux and anatomical location of the GSV.
Methods: We retrospectively reviewed ultrasound images of limbs with varicose veins who underwent surgery. We evaluated the distribution of reflux and depth of the GSV, as well as the access site or ablated extent.
Results: A total of 549 limbs with GSV reflux in 450 patients were included in this study. The distal end of reflux was located in upper thigh in 9 (1.6%) limbs, mid-thigh in 41 (7.5%) limbs, lower thigh in 157 (28.6%) limbs, and below the knee segment in 290 (52.9%) limbs. The depth of the GSV was greater than 5 mm in upper thigh only in 25 (4.6%) limbs, from the junction to mid-thigh in 49 (8.9%) limbs, to lower thigh in 82 (14.9%) limbs, to the knee in 22 (4.0%) limbs, below the knee in 75 (13.7%) limbs, and in the entire length of the leg in 296 (53.9%) limbs. Lower thigh was the most frequently accessed site for the endovenous treatment.
Conclusion: Although reflux was distributed to the BK segment of the GSV in the majority of limbs, the ablation segments were often limited by the superficial location of the GSV.

Chronic venous ulcers are a debilitating condition that often significantly impacts the quality of life due to their tendency to recur. Recently, we encountered a case of challenging chronic obstructive iliofemoral venous disease, presenting as postthrombotic syndrome with a venous ulcer. Venous duplex ultrasound revealed evidence of venous reflux in the left great saphenous vein and small saphenous vein. A CT venogram indicated occlusion in the proximal femoral vein, common femoral vein, and external iliac veins, with collateral veins in the lower abdomen. This lesion was treated using a combination of two types of venous stents. A one-month follow-up revealed improvement in the patient’s edema and ulcer.