Purpose: To determine long-term patient satisfaction for percutaneous treatment by using sclerosing agents (sclerotherapy) and/or arterial embolization for peripherally located vascular malformations (VMs). This treatment has been described as successful; however, there is a relative paucity of published long-term results. Materials and Methods: This retrospective study was institutional review board approved; 107 patients treated for symptomatic VM were evaluated. After informed consent was obtained, 66 patients were sent a questionnaire regarding treatment effectiveness and patient satisfaction. Patient files and imaging data were retrieved to obtain information regarding the VMs and VM treatment. Kaplan-Meier survival curves were constructed to analyze clinical success rates over time. Results: The most frequent reasons for patients to seek treatment were pain (89%, n = 59) and swelling (91%, n = 60). The majority of VMs were the low-flow venous type (83%, n = 55). Three months after treatment, clinical success was reported for 58% (n = 38) of patients and clinical failure was reported for 42% (n = 28). At 1-, 2-, 3-, 4-, and 5-year follow-up, clinical success was 49%, 49%, 42%, 42%, and 42%, respectively. Twenty-seven (40%) patients experienced complications, 12 of which required additional treatment. In all, 35 (53%) patients reported being satisfied with their treatment. Patient satisfaction was closely correlated with clinically successful long-term outcome of treatment. Conclusion: Initial partial or complete relief of VM complaints after percutaneous treatment is expected in 58% of patients, irrespective of VM size or classification. These results were durable over a 5-year follow-up period.

doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2513081579, hdl.handle.net/1765/25247
Erasmus MC: University Medical Center Rotterdam

van der Linden, E, Pattynama, P.M.T, Heeres, B.C, de Jong, S.C, Hop, W.C.J, & Kroft, L.J.M. (2009). Long-term patient satisfaction after percutaneous treatment of peripheral vascular malformations. Radiology, 251(3), 926–932. doi:10.1148/radiol.2513081579