Patients
Single operator · Single arm
PRECISION IN EVERY POINT
SPO✦TIntermittent, point-by-point energy delivery for the below-knee great saphenous vein, exploring the balance between vein closure and protection of nearby nerves.
01 / THE CLINICAL CHALLENGE
Treating a refluxing vein means considering the sensory nerve beside it.
The great saphenous vein runs along the inner leg to the saphenofemoral junction (SFJ) in the groin. In the distal calf, it can lie close to the saphenous nerve, with individual variation. Thermal ablation must balance vein closure with heat exposure to the nearby nerve.
When reflux extends below the knee, above-knee treatment alone may leave persistent distal reflux. Treatment extent depends on ultrasound, symptoms and anatomy; not everyone requires full-length ablation.

Source: Yang CC. JVS–CIT. 2026;102468. Introduction, Fig. 1 Original article
02 / THE SPOT PRINCIPLE
Allow time to pause and reconfirm position between treatment points.
Each point receives one second at 6 W (6 J), followed by approximately 1 mm withdrawal and ultrasound reconfirmation. Pulses are separated by approximately 1–2 seconds. Pauses are intended to permit partial cooling, while the spacing aims for contiguous treatment.
Seven points illustrate the sequence only, not a fixed treatment count or a scale drawing. The study used 8–10 points per centimeter. The link between heat dissipation and nerve protection still requires experimental verification.
Zone 1 in this paper uses standard continuous pullback at 6–7 W, with LEED of 60–70 J/cm. Energy is delivered during withdrawal without inter-point pauses. This compares delivery patterns, not clinical superiority.
The transition is determined intraoperatively where the vein lies within 5 mm of the skin and tumescent separation from the nerve becomes more difficult. It is not a fixed line at the knee joint.
| Parameter | Zone 1 · Above knee | Zone 2 · Below-knee SPOT |
|---|---|---|
| Delivery mode | Standard continuous pullback | Intermittent point pulses |
| Power | 6–7 W | 6 W |
| Linear endovenous energy density | 60–70 J/cm | 48–60 J/cm |
| Pulse duration | Continuous | 1 s / 6 J |
| Points & withdrawal | — | 8–10 points/cm; ≈1 mm withdrawal |
| Inter-pulse interval | — | Approximately 1–2 seconds |
These settings describe the research protocol and require individual clinical judgment. SPOT does not exclusively use a 400 μm fiber, and 18G sheathless access is not the defining feature of this study.
Source: Yang CC. JVS–CIT. 2026;102468. Technique, Table I Original article
03 / EARLY CLINICAL EVIDENCE
January–June 2026: 13 consecutive patients with 19 symptomatic limbs, CEAP C3–C6.
Single operator · Single arm
CEAP C3–C6
Confirmed by duplex ultrasound
95% CI: 82.4%–100%
Saphenous nerve distribution
95% CI: 0%–17.6%
Reported paresthesia at one week was also 0/19. No deep vein thrombosis, heat-induced thrombosis, skin burn or wound infection was recorded. These are observations in a small sample, not evidence of a zero population complication rate. CI: confidence interval.
Source: Yang CC. JVS–CIT. 2026;102468. Results, Limitations, Table II Original article
04 / PRECISION IN PRACTICE
Assess symptoms, reflux extent, vein diameter and depth, and surrounding tissues with duplex ultrasound.
Use local tumescent anesthesia along the treatment segment. Vein depth and the difficulty of nerve separation inform the zone transition.
Use standard continuous pullback above the knee and SPOT below it. Tip visibility is essential. Point-by-point delivery increases operator dependence and procedural time.
The study assessed sensory symptoms at one week and one month, and duplex occlusion at one month. Long-term outcomes and comparative recovery remain unestablished.
Source: Yang CC. JVS–CIT. 2026;102468. Technique, Discussion, Limitations Original article
RESEARCH & PUBLICATION

Intermittent point-by-point energy delivery was explored in the below-knee great saphenous vein. All 19 limbs were occluded at one month, with no reported saphenous paresthesia. The small sample, absent comparator and brief follow-up prevent conclusions about comparative benefit.
Journal Pre-proof (full-text version reviewed) · Journal of Vascular Surgery Cases, Innovations and Techniques
DOI: 10.1016/j.jvscit.2026.102468

Source: Yang CC. JVS–CIT. 2026;102468. Fig. 2. © 2026 The Author(s). Original article
QUESTIONS & ANSWERS
Understand the principles, suitability and the limits of the evidence.
Source: Yang CC. JVS–CIT. 2026;102468. Technique, Results, Limitations Original article
Understand the source of reflux and your individual circumstances before discussing treatment.