Is Varithena (polidocanol) medically necessary for a 53-year-old female with varicose veins of the bilateral lower extremities?

Medical Advisory BoardAll articles are reviewed for accuracy by our Medical Advisory Board
Educational purpose only • Exercise caution as content is pending human review
Article Review Status
Submitted
Under Review
Approved

Last updated: November 5, 2025View editorial policy

Personalize

Help us tailor your experience

Which best describes you? Your choice helps us use language that's most understandable for you.

Medical Necessity Determination for Varithena (CPT 36465 x3)

Varithena sclerotherapy is NOT medically necessary for this patient because the critical prerequisite of treating saphenofemoral junction reflux with endovenous thermal ablation or surgical ligation has not been met, which is required to reduce the risk of varicose vein recurrence.

Critical Missing Criterion

The Aetna policy explicitly requires that if a patient has incompetence at the saphenofemoral junction, the junctional reflux must be treated by one or more endovenous ablation procedures (radiofrequency ablation, endovenous laser ablation, or surgical ligation/stripping) BEFORE or concurrent with sclerotherapy to reduce the risk of varicose vein recurrence. 1, 2

Evidence-Based Treatment Algorithm

The established treatment sequence for varicose veins with saphenofemoral junction incompetence follows this hierarchy:

  • First-line treatment: Endovenous thermal ablation (radiofrequency or laser) for the great saphenous vein or small saphenous vein with documented reflux at the saphenofemoral junction 1, 3
  • Second-line/adjunctive treatment: Foam sclerotherapy (including Varithena) for tributary veins and residual varicosities AFTER treating the main truncal reflux 1, 2
  • Third-line treatment: Surgical ligation and stripping when endovenous techniques are not feasible 3

Why This Sequence Matters

  • Multiple studies demonstrate that chemical sclerotherapy alone has significantly worse outcomes at 1-, 5-, and 8-year follow-ups compared to thermal ablation or surgery, with higher rates of recurrent great saphenous vein reflux and saphenofemoral junction failure 1
  • Treating the saphenofemoral junction with thermal ablation or ligation provides better long-term outcomes than foam sclerotherapy alone, with success rates of 85% at 2 years versus 72-89% for foam alone 1
  • The treatment plan must include treatment of saphenofemoral junction reflux to meet medical necessity criteria, as recommended by the American College of Radiology with moderate strength of evidence 1

Criteria This Patient DOES Meet

The patient satisfies several important criteria for varicose vein treatment:

  • Vein size requirement: Veins ≥2.5 mm diameter measured by ultrasound (medial saphenous veins documented on 9/25/25) 1, 2
  • Symptomatic criteria: Severe and persistent pain, swelling, aching, fatigue/heaviness interfering with activities of daily living (cannot sit or stand for extended periods) 1, 2, 3
  • Conservative management failure: Documented trial of 20-30mmHg compression therapy for >3 months with minimal relief, plus exercise and over-the-counter analgesics without significant improvement 1, 2, 3
  • Appropriate clinical presentation: Bilateral varicose veins with complications (I83.893), progressive symptoms over several years, moderate interference in daily activities 2, 3

What Should Happen Instead

The appropriate treatment plan should be:

  1. Initial treatment: Endovenous thermal ablation (radiofrequency ablation or endovenous laser ablation) of the great saphenous vein or small saphenous vein to address the saphenofemoral junction incompetence 1, 3

    • This has technical success rates of 91-100% at 1 year post-treatment 1
    • Can be performed under local anesthesia with immediate walking and quick return to activities 3
  2. Subsequent treatment: Varithena sclerotherapy for residual tributary veins and varicosities 4-6 weeks after the primary ablation procedure 1, 2

    • This combined approach provides comprehensive treatment with better long-term outcomes 1
    • Foam sclerotherapy is appropriate for veins 2.5mm or greater after the main truncal reflux is addressed 1, 2

FDA-Approved Indications for Varithena

The FDA label for polidocanol (Asclera/Varithena) indicates it is approved for sclerosing uncomplicated spider veins (≤1 mm diameter) and uncomplicated reticular veins (1-3 mm diameter) in the lower extremity, and specifically states "Asclera has not been studied in varicose veins more than 3mm in diameter" 4. While Varithena (the microfoam formulation) has been studied in larger veins with saphenofemoral junction incompetence, the clinical trials demonstrate efficacy when used as part of a comprehensive treatment approach 5, 6.

Common Pitfall to Avoid

Do not proceed directly to sclerotherapy alone when saphenofemoral junction incompetence is present. This approach leads to higher recurrence rates and suboptimal long-term outcomes because the underlying source of reflux remains untreated 1, 3. The presence of documented reflux at the saphenofemoral junction is significant and requires treatment with thermal ablation or surgical intervention to prevent recurrence 1.

Recommendation for Authorization

Deny the current request for Varithena x3 sessions as submitted. Instead, recommend authorization for:

  1. Endovenous thermal ablation (radiofrequency or laser) of the bilateral great saphenous veins or small saphenous veins (whichever demonstrates saphenofemoral junction incompetence on the 9/25/25 ultrasound) 1, 3
  2. Subsequent Varithena sclerotherapy sessions for residual tributary veins can be reconsidered 4-6 weeks after successful completion of the primary ablation procedure, with repeat ultrasound documentation 1, 2

This approach aligns with evidence-based guidelines from the American College of Radiology and American Academy of Family Physicians, which emphasize treating the saphenofemoral junction first to reduce recurrence risk and optimize long-term outcomes 1, 3.

References

Guideline

Varithena and Foam Sclerotherapy for Venous Insufficiency

Praxis Medical Insights: Practical Summaries of Clinical Guidelines, 2025

Guideline

Medical Necessity of Sclerotherapy for Varicose Veins

Praxis Medical Insights: Practical Summaries of Clinical Guidelines, 2025

Guideline

Varicose Vein Management

Praxis Medical Insights: Practical Summaries of Clinical Guidelines, 2025

Professional Medical Disclaimer

This information is intended for healthcare professionals. Any medical decision-making should rely on clinical judgment and independently verified information. The content provided herein does not replace professional discretion and should be considered supplementary to established clinical guidelines. Healthcare providers should verify all information against primary literature and current practice standards before application in patient care. Dr.Oracle assumes no liability for clinical decisions based on this content.

Have a follow-up question?

Our Medical A.I. is used by practicing medical doctors at top research institutions around the world. Ask any follow up question and get world-class guideline-backed answers instantly.