Registry to investigate the efficacy and safety of the VenaBlock© VeIn SEaling system for VaRicose veins in SingApore - Six months results of the RIVIERA trial

Comparative analysis of VenaBlock and VenaSeal Systems for catheter-guided endovenous cyanoacrylate closure in treating chronic venous insufficiency of the lower extremity: effectiveness and feasibility

Cyanoacrylate adhesive closure (CAC) systems are widely used to treat varicose veins. In terms of efficacy and safety, these nonthermal, non-tumescent methods are noninferior to endovenous thermal ablation techniques. However, no published studies have compared products that use CAC systems. VenaSeal® (Medtronic, Santa Rosa, CA, USA) and VenaBlock® (Invamed) are the most commonly used CAC-based products worldwide. This study aimed to focus on the efficacy of these two commonly used products, with little emphasis on safety. Published full-text articles on the VenaBlock® and VenaSeal® systems were searched. Data for each product were evaluated by comparing them with each other in terms of effectiveness. In total, 1882 extremities from 11 studies using VenaBlock® and 524 extremities from eight studies using VenaSeal® were included and compared. Both devices were effective, and their cumulative recanalization-free survival rates were similar (P=0.188) at the 6-, 12-, 24-, 36-, and 60-month follow-ups. Both products improved the venous clinical severity score (VCSS) and quality of life (QoL) scores. VenaBlock® and VenaSeal® are effective in terms of cumulative recanalization-free survival rates, and no significant difference was found between the two groups (P=0.188). Both significantly improve the VCSS and QoL scores. CAC is feasible for the treatment of varicose veins.

Cyanoacrylate glue reactions: A systematic review, cases, and proposed mechanisms

OBJECTIVE

Cyanoacrylate glue closure was first used in humans 10 years ago to treat venous reflux of the axial veins. Studies have since shown its clinical efficacy in vein closure. However, great need exists to elucidate further the types of specific adverse reactions that cyanoacrylate glue can cause for better patient selection and to minimize these events. In the present study, we systematically reviewed the literature to identify the types of reported reactions. In addition, we explored the pathophysiology contributing to these reactions and proposed the mechanistic pathway with inclusion of actual cases.

METHODS

We searched the literature for reports of reactions following cyanoacrylate glue use in patients with venous diseases between 2012 and 2022. The search was performed using MeSH (medical subject headings) terms. The terms included cyanoacrylate, venous insufficiency, chronic venous disorder, varicose veins, vein varicosities, venous ulcer, venous wound, CEAP (clinical, etiologic, anatomic, pathophysiologic), vein, adverse events, phlebitis, hypersensitivity, foreign body granuloma, giant cell, endovenous glue-induced thrombosis, and allergy. The search was limited to the literature reported in English. These studies were evaluated for the type of product used and the reactions noted. A systematic review, in accordance with the PRISMA (preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses) method, was performed. Covidence software (Melbourne, VC, Australia) was used for full-text screening and data extraction. Two reviewers reviewed the data, and the content expert served as the tiebreaker.

RESULTS

We identified 102, of which, 37 reported on cyanoacrylate use other than in the context of chronic venous diseases and were excluded. Fifty-five reports were determined appropriate for data extraction. The adverse reactions to cyanoacrylate glue were phlebitis, hypersensitivity, foreign body granuloma, and endovenous glue-induced thrombosis.

CONCLUSIONS

Although cyanoacrylate glue closure for venous reflux is generally a safe and clinically effective treatment choice for patients with symptomatic chronic venous disease and axial reflux, some adverse events could be specific to the properties of the cyanoacrylate product. We propose mechanisms for how such reactions can occur based on histologic changes, published reports, and case examples; however, further exploration is necessary to confirm these theories.