CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology

, Volume 42, Issue 2, pp 213–219 | Cite as

Radiofrequency Ablation of the Marginal Venous System in Patients with Venous Malformations

  • W. UllerEmail author
  • S. Hammer
  • M. Wildgruber
  • R. Müller-Wille
  • H. Goessmann
  • W. A. Wohlgemuth
Clinical Investigation Venous Interventions
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Venous Interventions



To evaluate radiofrequency ablation (RFA) for closure of marginal veins in pediatric and adult patients with venous malformations.

Materials and methods

Medical records, imaging and procedure details were retrospectively reviewed in patients who underwent RFA of the marginal vein in a 17-month period. Additional sclerotherapy (n = 19) and coil embolization of the marginal vein were performed (n = 2).


A total of 23 marginal veins were treated in 20 patients. Mean age at treatment was 16 years ± 9.4 (1–37 years). Pre-procedural magnetic resonance imaging revealed thoracoabdominal marginal veins in 3 patients. A type I marginal vein (draining in the great saphenous vein below the popliteal vein) was identified in 1 and type IIa/IIb (draining in a median/lateral accessory saphenous vein) in 2/8 cases. Type III (draining into the profunda femoral vein) was detected in 8, and type IV (draining into gluteal veins) in 1. Mean diameter of the marginal veins was 13.2 mm ± 4 (7–20 mm). Patency was found in 1 during follow-up (22 months ± 9.8). Complete or partial occlusion was achieved in 94.5% of the veins. One patient showed signs of thrombophlebitis after the procedure, and another incomplete paresis of the peroneal nerve.


RFA is effective as minimally invasive treatment of the marginal venous system. These veins should be treated early in life. Marginal veins with large diameter, residual tributaries and the intrafascial courses usually require adjunct coil embolization and sclerotherapy.

Level of Evidence

Case series, Level IV.


Venous malformation Radiofrequency ablation Marginal venous system Marginal vein Embryologic vein 


Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

Authors WU, SH, WM, MWR, GH and WAW declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Ethical Approval

This retrospective study was approved by the institutional review board of the University of Regensburg; for this type of study, formal consent is not required.

Informed Consent

This study has obtained IRB approval from ethical committee of the University of Regensburg, and the need for informed consent was waived.

Consent for Publication

For this type of study, consent for publication is not required.


  1. 1.
    Weber J. Invasive Diagnostik angeborene Gefäßfehler. In: Loose DA, Weber J, editors. Angeborene Gefäßmißbildungen. Lüneburg, Germany: Nordlanddruck Verlag; 1997. p. 127–63.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Mattassi R, Vaghi M. Management of the marginal vein: current issues. Phlebology. 2007;22(6):283–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Alomari AI. Klippel–Trenaunay syndrome: imaging and treatment options. In: Becqueim JP, Alimi YS, Gerard JL, editors. Controversies and updates in vascular surgery. Marseilles, France: Edizioni Minerva Medica; 2010. p. 433–41.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Alomari AI. Diversion venography—a modified technique in Klippel-Trenaunay syndrome: initial experience. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2010;21(5):685–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hammer S, Uller W, Manger F, Fellner C, Zeman F, Wohlgemuth WA. Time-resolved magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) at 3.0 Tesla for evaluation of hemodynamic characteristics of vascular malformations: description of distinct subgroups. Eur Radiol. 2017;27(1):296–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Filippiadis DK, Binkert C, Pellerin O, Hoffmann RT, Krajina A, Pereira PL. Cirse quality assurance document and standards for classification of complications: the CIRSE classification system. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2017;40(8):1141–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Samuel M, Spitz L. Klippel–Trenaunay syndrome: clinical features, complications and management in children. Br J Surg. 1995;82(6):757–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kim YW, Lee BB, Cho JH, Do YS, Kim DI, Kim ES. Haemodynamic and clinical assessment of lateral marginal vein excision in patients with a predominantly venous malformation of the lower extremity. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2007;33(1):122–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    King K, Landrigan-Ossar M, Clemens R, Chaudry G, Alomari AI. The use of endovenous laser treatment in toddlers. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2013;24(6):855–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Patel PA, Barnacle AM, Stuart S, Amaral JG, John PR. Endovenous laser ablation therapy in children: applications and outcomes. Pediatr Radiol. 2017;47(10):1353–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ahadiat O, Higgins S, Ly A, Nazemi A, Wysong A. Review of endovenous thermal ablation of the great saphenous vein: endovenous laser therapy versus radiofrequency ablation. Dermatol Surg. 2018;44(5):679–88.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Aurshina A, Alsheekh A, Kibrik P, Hingorani A, Marks N, Ascher E. Recanalization after endovenous thermal ablation. Ann Vasc Surg. 2018;52:158–62. Scholar
  13. 13.
    Proebstle TM, Alm BJ, Göckeritz O, Wenzel C, Noppeney T, Lebard C, Sessa C, Creton D, Pichot O. Five-year results from the prospective European multicentre cohort study on radiofrequency segmental thermal ablation for incompetent great saphenous veins. Br J Surg. 2015;102(3):212–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Sydnor M, Mavropoulos J, Slobodnik N, Wolfe L, Strife B, Komorowski D. A randomized prospective long-term (> 1 year) clinical trial comparing the efficacy and safety of radiofrequency ablation to 980 nm laser ablation of the great saphenous vein. Phlebology. 2017;32(6):415–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Healy DA, Kimura S, Power D, Elhaj A, Abdeldaim Y, Cross KS, McGreal GT, Burke PE, Moloney T, Manning BJ, Kavanagh EG. A systematic review and meta-analysis of thrombotic events following endovenous thermal ablation of the great saphenous vein. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2018;56:410–24. Scholar
  16. 16.
    Frasier K, Giangola G, Rosen R, Ginat DT. Endovascular radiofrequency ablation: a novel treatment of venous insufficiency in Klippel–Trenaunay patients. J Vasc Surg. 2008;47(6):1339–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sermsathanasawadi N, Hongku K, Wongwanit C, Ruangsetakit C, Chinsakchai K, Mutirangura P. Endovenous radiofrequency thermal ablation and ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy in treatment of Klippel–Trenaunay syndrome. Ann Vasc Dis. 2014;7(1):52–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Tamura K, Maruyama T. Mid-term report on the safety and effectiveness of endovenous radiofrequency ablation for varicose veins. Ann Vasc Dis. 2017;10(4):398–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature and the Cardiovascular and Interventional Radiological Society of Europe (CIRSE) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of RadiologyUniversity Medical Center RegensburgRegensburgGermany
  2. 2.Department of Clinical RadiologyUniversity Hospital MünsterMünsterGermany
  3. 3.Department of Interventional and Diagnostic RadiologyUniversity Medical Center GöttingenGöttingenGermany
  4. 4.University Clinic and Policlinic of RadiologyMartin-Luther-Universität Halle-WittenbergHalle (Saale)Germany

Personalised recommendations