Format

Send to

Choose Destination
J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord. 2018 Sep;6(5):606-613. doi: 10.1016/j.jvsv.2018.04.009. Epub 2018 Jun 15.

Twenty-four month results from a randomized trial of cyanoacrylate closure versus radiofrequency ablation for the treatment of incompetent great saphenous veins.

Author information

1
Lake Washington Vascular, Bellevue, Wash. Electronic address: drgibson@lkwv.com.
2
Morrison Vein Institute, Scottsdale, Ariz.
3
OhioHealth, Riverside Methodist Hospital, Columbus, Ohio.
4
Venous Institute of Buffalo, Buffalo, NY.
5
Maryland Laser, Skin, & Vein, Hunt Valley, Md.
6
Wild Iris Consulting LLC, Palo Alto, Calif.
7
Medtronic, Santa Rosa, Calif.
8
Inovia Vein Specialty Center, Bend, Ore.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE:

We previously reported 3-month and 12-month occlusion rates after treatment of clinically symptomatic saphenous vein reflux with either cyanoacrylate closure (CAC) using the VenaSeal Closure System (Medtronic, Dublin, Ireland) or radiofrequency ablation (RFA) in a randomized, multicenter, clinical trial, VenaSeal Sapheon Closure System vs Radiofrequency Ablation for Incompetent Great Saphenous Veins (VeClose). Herein we report the 24-month follow-up results of the VeClose trial.

METHODS:

There were 222 patients with symptomatic great saphenous vein (GSV) incompetence who were randomly assigned to receive either CAC (n = 108) or RFA (n = 114). Patients were not allowed to receive adjunctive treatment of tributary varicosities until after the 3-month visit. Duplex ultrasound of the target vein was performed at day 3 and months 1, 3, 6, 12, and 24 after treatment, and closure was assessed by ultrasound by the treating physician. Overall 24-month success rates were compared; in addition, time to first reopening of the target vein was evaluated using survival analysis. End points such as Venous Clinical Severity Score, EuroQoL-5 Dimension, and Aberdeen Varicose Vein Questionnaire were evaluated.

RESULTS:

Of 222 randomized patients, 171 completed the 24-month follow-up, which included 87 from the CAC group and 84 from the RFA group. The 24-month complete closure rate was 95.3% in the CAC group and 94.0% in the RFA group, demonstrating continued noninferiority of CAC compared with RFA (P = .0034). Symptoms and quality of life improved similarly in both groups. No clinically significant device- or procedure-related late adverse events occurred.

CONCLUSIONS:

Both CAC and RFA were effective in closure of the target GSV, resulting in similar and significant improvements in the patient's quality of life through 24 months. These results suggest that CAC of the GSV is safe and durable out to 2 years.

KEYWORDS:

Cyanoacrylate; Endovenous laser; Nontumescent nonthermal; Radiofrequency ablation; Saphenous vein; Tumescent anesthesia; Varicose vein

PMID:
29914814
DOI:
10.1016/j.jvsv.2018.04.009
Free full text

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Elsevier Science
Loading ...
Support Center