Impact of venorrhaphy and vein ligation in isolated lower-extremity venous injuries on venous thromboembolism and edema

Nathan R. Manley, Louis J. Magnotti, Timothy Fabian, Martin Croce, John P. Sharpe

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

4 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

BACKGROUND Following venous injury, venorrhaphy can restore outflow, although it risks thrombosis and venous thromboembolism (VTE). Vein ligation is a faster option, although it potentially risks extremity edema. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the management of venous injury on VTE and extremity edema in patients with isolated lower-extremity venous injuries. METHODS Patients with common iliac, external iliac, and femoral venous injuries over a 10-year period were stratified by age, shock, management of venous injury, injury severity, and timing and type of anticoagulation. Outcomes included development of extremity edema and VTE (pulmonary embolism, deep venous thrombosis). Outcomes were then evaluated to determine risk factors for symptomatic lower-extremity edema and VTE by the management of venous injuries. RESULTS Eighty-four patients were identified: 20 common iliac, 27 external iliac, 37 femoral. Forty-nine underwent vein repair and 35 underwent vein ligation. Ninety-three percent were male with a mean Injury Severity Score and Glasgow Coma Scale score of 17 and 14, respectively. Venous thromboembolism occurred in 18 (21%), 15 (18%) deep venous thrombosis, and 4 (5%) pulmonary embolisms. Thirty-two (38%) patients developed lower-extremity edema. Those who underwent vein ligation had a greater degree of shock on presentation (RBC transfusions, 14 vs. 8 units; p = 0.03) and were more likely to receive prophylactic fasciotomies (60% vs. 33%, p = 0.01). There was no difference in time to or type of chemoprophylaxis between patients who underwent vein repair and those who received vein ligation. However, patients with vein ligation had fewer episodes of VTE (9% vs. 31%, p = 0.02) with no difference in symptomatic lower-extremity edema (37% vs. 39%, p = 0.88) or amputation rates (0% vs. 2%, p = 0.99). CONCLUSION Vein repair had a higher incidence of VTE while providing no additional benefit in reducing symptomatic extremity edema compared to ligation in patients suffering venous injury. Ligation of most extremity venous injuries can be performed without increasing patient morbidity. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Therapeutic study, level IV.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)325-329
Number of pages5
JournalJournal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery
Volume84
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Feb 1 2018

Fingerprint

Venous Thromboembolism
Ligation
Lower Extremity
Veins
Edema
Wounds and Injuries
Extremities
Thigh
Pulmonary Embolism
Venous Thrombosis
Shock
Glasgow Coma Scale
Injury Severity Score
Chemoprevention
Amputation
Thrombosis
Morbidity
Incidence

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Surgery
  • Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine

Cite this

Impact of venorrhaphy and vein ligation in isolated lower-extremity venous injuries on venous thromboembolism and edema. / Manley, Nathan R.; Magnotti, Louis J.; Fabian, Timothy; Croce, Martin; Sharpe, John P.

In: Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery, Vol. 84, No. 2, 01.02.2018, p. 325-329.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Manley, Nathan R. ; Magnotti, Louis J. ; Fabian, Timothy ; Croce, Martin ; Sharpe, John P. / Impact of venorrhaphy and vein ligation in isolated lower-extremity venous injuries on venous thromboembolism and edema. In: Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery. 2018 ; Vol. 84, No. 2. pp. 325-329.
@article{ae7d0b4387f94b2da760f191169f6445,
title = "Impact of venorrhaphy and vein ligation in isolated lower-extremity venous injuries on venous thromboembolism and edema",
abstract = "BACKGROUND Following venous injury, venorrhaphy can restore outflow, although it risks thrombosis and venous thromboembolism (VTE). Vein ligation is a faster option, although it potentially risks extremity edema. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the management of venous injury on VTE and extremity edema in patients with isolated lower-extremity venous injuries. METHODS Patients with common iliac, external iliac, and femoral venous injuries over a 10-year period were stratified by age, shock, management of venous injury, injury severity, and timing and type of anticoagulation. Outcomes included development of extremity edema and VTE (pulmonary embolism, deep venous thrombosis). Outcomes were then evaluated to determine risk factors for symptomatic lower-extremity edema and VTE by the management of venous injuries. RESULTS Eighty-four patients were identified: 20 common iliac, 27 external iliac, 37 femoral. Forty-nine underwent vein repair and 35 underwent vein ligation. Ninety-three percent were male with a mean Injury Severity Score and Glasgow Coma Scale score of 17 and 14, respectively. Venous thromboembolism occurred in 18 (21{\%}), 15 (18{\%}) deep venous thrombosis, and 4 (5{\%}) pulmonary embolisms. Thirty-two (38{\%}) patients developed lower-extremity edema. Those who underwent vein ligation had a greater degree of shock on presentation (RBC transfusions, 14 vs. 8 units; p = 0.03) and were more likely to receive prophylactic fasciotomies (60{\%} vs. 33{\%}, p = 0.01). There was no difference in time to or type of chemoprophylaxis between patients who underwent vein repair and those who received vein ligation. However, patients with vein ligation had fewer episodes of VTE (9{\%} vs. 31{\%}, p = 0.02) with no difference in symptomatic lower-extremity edema (37{\%} vs. 39{\%}, p = 0.88) or amputation rates (0{\%} vs. 2{\%}, p = 0.99). CONCLUSION Vein repair had a higher incidence of VTE while providing no additional benefit in reducing symptomatic extremity edema compared to ligation in patients suffering venous injury. Ligation of most extremity venous injuries can be performed without increasing patient morbidity. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Therapeutic study, level IV.",
author = "Manley, {Nathan R.} and Magnotti, {Louis J.} and Timothy Fabian and Martin Croce and Sharpe, {John P.}",
year = "2018",
month = "2",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1097/TA.0000000000001746",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "84",
pages = "325--329",
journal = "Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery",
issn = "2163-0755",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Impact of venorrhaphy and vein ligation in isolated lower-extremity venous injuries on venous thromboembolism and edema

AU - Manley, Nathan R.

AU - Magnotti, Louis J.

AU - Fabian, Timothy

AU - Croce, Martin

AU - Sharpe, John P.

PY - 2018/2/1

Y1 - 2018/2/1

N2 - BACKGROUND Following venous injury, venorrhaphy can restore outflow, although it risks thrombosis and venous thromboembolism (VTE). Vein ligation is a faster option, although it potentially risks extremity edema. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the management of venous injury on VTE and extremity edema in patients with isolated lower-extremity venous injuries. METHODS Patients with common iliac, external iliac, and femoral venous injuries over a 10-year period were stratified by age, shock, management of venous injury, injury severity, and timing and type of anticoagulation. Outcomes included development of extremity edema and VTE (pulmonary embolism, deep venous thrombosis). Outcomes were then evaluated to determine risk factors for symptomatic lower-extremity edema and VTE by the management of venous injuries. RESULTS Eighty-four patients were identified: 20 common iliac, 27 external iliac, 37 femoral. Forty-nine underwent vein repair and 35 underwent vein ligation. Ninety-three percent were male with a mean Injury Severity Score and Glasgow Coma Scale score of 17 and 14, respectively. Venous thromboembolism occurred in 18 (21%), 15 (18%) deep venous thrombosis, and 4 (5%) pulmonary embolisms. Thirty-two (38%) patients developed lower-extremity edema. Those who underwent vein ligation had a greater degree of shock on presentation (RBC transfusions, 14 vs. 8 units; p = 0.03) and were more likely to receive prophylactic fasciotomies (60% vs. 33%, p = 0.01). There was no difference in time to or type of chemoprophylaxis between patients who underwent vein repair and those who received vein ligation. However, patients with vein ligation had fewer episodes of VTE (9% vs. 31%, p = 0.02) with no difference in symptomatic lower-extremity edema (37% vs. 39%, p = 0.88) or amputation rates (0% vs. 2%, p = 0.99). CONCLUSION Vein repair had a higher incidence of VTE while providing no additional benefit in reducing symptomatic extremity edema compared to ligation in patients suffering venous injury. Ligation of most extremity venous injuries can be performed without increasing patient morbidity. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Therapeutic study, level IV.

AB - BACKGROUND Following venous injury, venorrhaphy can restore outflow, although it risks thrombosis and venous thromboembolism (VTE). Vein ligation is a faster option, although it potentially risks extremity edema. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the management of venous injury on VTE and extremity edema in patients with isolated lower-extremity venous injuries. METHODS Patients with common iliac, external iliac, and femoral venous injuries over a 10-year period were stratified by age, shock, management of venous injury, injury severity, and timing and type of anticoagulation. Outcomes included development of extremity edema and VTE (pulmonary embolism, deep venous thrombosis). Outcomes were then evaluated to determine risk factors for symptomatic lower-extremity edema and VTE by the management of venous injuries. RESULTS Eighty-four patients were identified: 20 common iliac, 27 external iliac, 37 femoral. Forty-nine underwent vein repair and 35 underwent vein ligation. Ninety-three percent were male with a mean Injury Severity Score and Glasgow Coma Scale score of 17 and 14, respectively. Venous thromboembolism occurred in 18 (21%), 15 (18%) deep venous thrombosis, and 4 (5%) pulmonary embolisms. Thirty-two (38%) patients developed lower-extremity edema. Those who underwent vein ligation had a greater degree of shock on presentation (RBC transfusions, 14 vs. 8 units; p = 0.03) and were more likely to receive prophylactic fasciotomies (60% vs. 33%, p = 0.01). There was no difference in time to or type of chemoprophylaxis between patients who underwent vein repair and those who received vein ligation. However, patients with vein ligation had fewer episodes of VTE (9% vs. 31%, p = 0.02) with no difference in symptomatic lower-extremity edema (37% vs. 39%, p = 0.88) or amputation rates (0% vs. 2%, p = 0.99). CONCLUSION Vein repair had a higher incidence of VTE while providing no additional benefit in reducing symptomatic extremity edema compared to ligation in patients suffering venous injury. Ligation of most extremity venous injuries can be performed without increasing patient morbidity. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Therapeutic study, level IV.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85041593563&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85041593563&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/TA.0000000000001746

DO - 10.1097/TA.0000000000001746

M3 - Article

C2 - 29370050

AN - SCOPUS:85041593563

VL - 84

SP - 325

EP - 329

JO - Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery

JF - Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery

SN - 2163-0755

IS - 2

ER -