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.

Current Best Practice in the Management of Varicose Veins

This article outlines the current best practice in the management of varicose veins. “Varicose veins” traditionally means bulging veins, usually seen on the legs, when standing. It is now a general term used to describe these bulging veins, and also underlying incompetent veins that reflux and cause the surface varicose veins. Importantly, “varicose veins” is often used for superficial venous reflux even in the absence of visible bulging veins. These can be simply called “hidden varicose veins”. Varicose veins usually deteriorate, progressing to discomfort, swollen ankles, skin damage, leg ulcers, superficial venous thrombosis and venous bleeds. Patients with varicose veins and symptoms or signs have a significant advantage in having treatment over conservative treatment with compression stockings or venotropic drugs. Small varicose veins or telangiectasia without symptoms or signs can be treated for cosmetic reasons. However, most have underlying venous reflux from saphenous, perforator or local “feeding veins” and so investigation with venous duplex should be mandatory before treatment. Best practice for investigating leg varicose veins is venous duplex ultrasound in the erect position, performed by a specialist trained in ultrasonography optimally not the doctor who performs the treatment. Pelvic vein reflux is best investigated with transvaginal duplex ultrasound (TVS), performed using the Holdstock-Harrison protocol. In men or women unable to have TVS, venography or cross-sectional imaging is needed. Best practice for treating truncal vein incompetence is endovenous thermal ablation. Increasing evidence suggests that significant incompetent perforating veins should be found and treated by thermal ablation using the transluminal occlusion of perforator (TRLOP) approach, and that incompetent pelvic veins refluxing into symptomatic varicose veins in the genital region or leg should be treated by coil embolisation. Bulging varicosities should be treated by phlebectomy at the time of truncal vein ablation. Monitoring and reporting outcomes is essential for doctors and patients; hence, participation in a venous registry should probably be mandatory.

Experience with VariClose® vein sealing system in the Czech Republic

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to assess occlusion rates of saphenous veins treated with the VariClose vein sealing system.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis including a total of 64 patients from four centres from the Czech Republic. Occlusion was defined as a non-compressible vein with absence of flow with exception to the first 3 cm from the saphenofemoral or saphenopopliteal junction on duplex ultrasound.

RESULTS

In 64 patients a total of 79 veins were treated. Technical success of the procedure was achieved in 74 (94%) of cases. The mean follow-up was 5.5 months. The closure rates calculated by the Kaplan-Meier method at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months were 94%, 85%, 69% and 36%, respectively, and there were no significant differences between centers. The average difference in VCSS score before and after the procedure was 1.8.

CONCLUSIONS

The present study demonstrated surprisingly worse occlusion rates than the current literature.

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

BACKGROUND

The Venablock^© Venous Closure System (Invamed, Ankara, Turkey) is a novel cyanoacrylate-based non-thermal non-tumescent embolization device to block refluxing truncal veins for chronic venous insufficiency and varicose veins. The aim was to prospectively evaluate the safety and 6 months efficacy of Venablock^© for the treatment of primary great saphenous vein (GSV) and small saphenous vein (SSV) incompetency in a multi-ethnic cohort from Singapore.

METHODS

This was a single arm, single investigator prospective study of 29 patients (39 limbs, 39 truncal veins) recruited over a 5-month period (August 2019 to February 2020), who were treated with the Venablock^© device at a tertiary vascular unit in Singapore. Patients with symptomatic varicose veins (C2-6) and had truncal reflux > 0.5 second on venous Duplex ultrasound were included. Follow-up occurred at 2 weeks, 3 and 6 months with dedicated quality of life questionnaires and a targeted Duplex ultrasound performed to check for continued venous occlusion.

RESULT

Mean age was 61.4 (±11.0) years and mean BMI was 26.2 (±5.7) kg/m². 11/29 (37.9%) were males. Most common CEAP class treated was 2 (12/29, 41.3%). Mean diameter of treated GSV was 5.7 (±2.0) mm, 4.8 (±1.7) mm and 4.2 (±1.3) mm for the proximal, mid and distal above knee segments respectively. Mean time from access puncture to sheath removal was 23.4 (±10.0) mins. Vein occlusion at 2 weeks, 3 and 6 months was 39/39 (100%), 39/39 (100%) and 36/37 (97.2%) respectively. 5/29 (17.2%) developed puncture site infections, of which 3/29 (7.7%) required formal surgical drainage. 3/29 (7.7%) developed phlebitis. At 6 months, revised Venous Clinical Severity Score improved from 5.2 (±3.5) to 2.1 (±2.9; p < .001); EuroQol-5 Dimension score, from 7.4 (±2.1) to 5.7 (±1.4; p < .001); Aberdeen Varicose Vein Questionnaire score, from 18.1 (±15.5) to 7.9 (±8.9; p = .007); and Chronic Venous Insufficiency Questionnaire, from 18.6 (±16.2) to 4.5 (±6.3; p < .001).

CONCLUSION

Venablock^© is a safe and efficacious option of treating truncal venous insufficiency in a multi-ethnic Asian cohort from Singapore in the short term. There is a significant improvement in QoL. Longer follow-up is required to assess the durability of this technique, in particular the higher puncture site infection rates observed compared to other glue-based therapies.

VariClose® vein sealing system is inferior to endovenous laser ablation for the treatment of varicose veins

BACKGROUND

One of the three commercially available cyanoacrylate venous glues used for the treatment of saphenous vein insufficiency is the VariClose® vein sealing system. Previous studies have documented a high rate of occlusion and minimal postoperative complications. The aim of this study was to compare occlusion rates and clinical outcomes of endovenous laser treatment with the VariClose® vein sealing system in the treatment of truncal vein insufficiency.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Retrospective non-randomized single center study with prospectively collected data comparing endovenous laser treatment and VariClose® procedures between April 2018 and November 2019.

RESULTS

VariClose® was used in 27 patients (30 veins) and endovenous laser treatment in 42 patients (51 veins). The occlusion rate at one, three, and six months were 96%, 85%, and 65% for VariClose® procedures and 100%, 100%, and 97% for endovenous laser treatment procedures (p = 0.01), respectively. Reduction of VCSS scores before treatment and at the last postoperative follow-up visit in the VariClose® group dropped by an average of 1.8 ± 1.6 and in the endovenous laser treatment by an average of 3.3 ± 2.9 (p = 0.01).

CONCLUSION

VariClose® vein sealing system is inferior to endovenous laser treatment as a treatment option for varicose veins as it has a higher recanalization rate.

Scoping review of non-thermal technologies for endovenous ablation for treatment of venous insufficiency

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this review article is to compare the outcomes of newer non-thermal endovenous ablation techniques to thermal ablation techniques for the treatment of symptomatic venous insufficiency.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

Three independent reviewers screened PubMed® and EMBASE® databases to identify relevant studies. A total of 1173 articles were identified from database search that met our inclusion criteria. Two articles were identified through reference search. Removal of duplicates from our original search yielded 695 articles. We then screened these articles and assessed 173 full-text articles for eligibility. Subsequent to exclusion, 11 full-text articles were selected for final inclusion.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

The non-thermal techniques are similar to thermal techniques in terms of a high technical success rate, closure rate at 12 months, change in Venous Clinical Severity Score and change in quality of life after procedure. However, the length of procedure is shorter for non-thermal modalities and patient comfort is improved with lower pain scores. Return to work may also be earlier after non-thermal ablation. The rates of bruising, phlebitis and paresthesia are higher after thermal ablation.

CONCLUSIONS

The non-thermal modalities are safe and effective in treating venous reflux and have shown improved patient comfort and shorter length of procedure which may make them favorable for use compared to the thermal modalities.

A systematic review and meta-analysis comparing the efficacy of cyanoacrylate ablation over endovenous thermal ablation for treating incompetent saphenous veins

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to systemically review and analyze the efficacy of cyanoacrylate ablation (CA) in comparison with endovenous thermal ablation (ETA) for the treatment of incompetent saphenous veins.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was conducted using databases of Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane Library from the times of their inception to April 2020. Studies were selected based on inclusion and exclusion criteria after assessing the risk of bias in comparative studies with Cochrane and rating quality of evidence with the GRADE methodology. The meta-analysis was carried out using the Review Manager 5.4 program to conduct homogeneity tests.

RESULTS

One cohort study and three randomized controlled trials (RCT), including a total of 1457 participants were included in the meta-analysis. ETA included endovenous laser ablation (ELVA) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) in the selected studies. Comparison between CA and a combination of EVLA and RFA or RFA alone were carried out in two of RCTs, while comparison between CA with EVLA was conducted in one RCT and the cohort study. There was no statistical difference in closure rates between CA and ETA after pooled analysis. Similar symptom alleviation observed between different groups. However, the CA group showed a lower ecchymosis rate than RFA and a significantly lower incidence of adverse events, such as ecchymosis, phlebitis and paresthesia, than EVLA. Compared with ETA, the patients received CA treatment exhibited lower pain scores in a shorter procedure duration without needing compression stocking, returned to normal life sooner, and had significantly better quality of care. There was no significant difference in the number needed to treat for additional therapy after three months of follow-up between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis indicates that CA has better overall outcomes than ETA and offers superior clinical benefits in the treatment of incompetent saphenous veins.

What is the optimal treatment technique for great saphenous vein diameter of ≥10 mm? Comparison of five different approaches

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of five different treatment approaches in patients with a great saphenous vein (GSV) diameter of ≥10 mm.

METHODS

A total of 697 extremities of 671 patients who were diagnosed with a GSV diameter of ≥10 mm underwent conventional surgery or endovenous therapy for symptomatic varicose veins between January 2012 and January 2017 were included in this retrospective study. All extremities included in the study were divided into five groups as follows: high ligation + stripping (HLS), radiofrequency ablation (RFA), cyanoacrylate closure (CAC), endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) procedures at 980 nm and 1,470 nm wavelengths.

RESULTS

Among all groups, despite lower recurrence rates in HLS group than the other groups, there was no significant difference at 6 months and 1 year among the HLS, EVLA at 1,470 nm wavelength, and RFA groups. The recurrence rates of EVLA at 980 nm wavelength and CAC groups were found higher than other groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, our study results show that although HLS seems to be an effective method for the treatment of a GSV diameter of ≥10 mm with a low recurrence rate, it does not statistically significantly differ from EVLA at 1,470 nm wavelength and RFA. Therefore, we believe that EVLA at 1,470 nm wavelength and RFA can be preferred over HLS with low pain scores in this patient population.

Endovenous cyanoacrylate ablation for chronic venous insufficiency and varicose veins among Asians

Introduction: Endovenous cyanoacrylate glue (CAG) ablation for the treatment of chronic venous insufficiency (CVI) and varicose veins has shown non-inferior outcomes with an excellent safety profile, high patient satisfaction rate, and excellent efficacy when compared to the gold standard of endothermal ablation. A review of the current literature for CAG use in CVI showed that most studies and longer-term data are from Caucasian-based populations, which are subject to different anatomical venous variations and socio-economical contexts. This review aimed to gather the current evidence for CAG use in Asian CVI patients. Methods: Asian studies for the use of CAG in CVI were included in this review. Successful ablation rates, quality of life improvement and novel complications such as glue hypersensitivity reactions are described, along with anatomical descriptions of superficial venous anatomy in study patients. Use of CAG in Singapore and Asia was addressed. Results: CAG has been gaining traction as an option for CVI treatment in Asians. In Singapore, it has been adopted with comparable low complication rates and significant improvement of quality of life after treatment. As we increase our understanding of the variations in venous anatomy in the Asian population, new techniques such as retrograde deployment of the device and use of CAG ablation for venous leg ulcers have been developed. Conclusion: Further robust evidence in terms of large randomised control trials along with costeffectiveness studies are needed to determine the true value of CAG ablation in the Asian setting.

Efficacy of Cyanoacrylate Glue Ablation of Primary Truncal Varicose Veins Compared to Existing Endovenous Techniques: A Systematic Review of the Literature

Introduction  One-third of adults in the United States and United Kingdom suffer from varicose veins. n -butyl-2-cyanoacrylate (NBCA) glue is a novel endovascular, nontumescent, nonthermal ablation technique for treatment of this condition. It has proved effective in multiple studies since its first use in 2013. The aim of this systematic review is to assess the efficacy of NBCA in ablating primary truncal varicose veins and eliminating reflux compared with existing endovascular techniques. Secondary outcomes include complications and quality of life. Methods  PRISMA was used as a guide and studies were screened for risk of bias and methodological quality. Subjects had to be ≥18 years of age and followed-up posttreatment with color Duplex ultrasound (DUS). Eligibility criteria included saphenofemoral junction (SFJ) or saphenopopliteal junction (SPJ) incompetence with reflux down truncal veins lasting >0.5 seconds on DUS interrogation and a Clinical, Etiological, Anatomical, and Pathophysiological classification of venous disorders ranging between C1 and C6. Results  Out of 2,910 patients (3,220 veins) in 17 studies, 1,981 were administered NBCA, 445 radiofrequency ablation (RFA), and 484 endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) with mean procedure times of 25.7, 23.2, and 28.7 minutes, respectively. Mean recruitment period was 9 months (1-36 months) and followed-up for an average of 12.3 months (1-36 months). The majority were C2 to C3. Two-year occlusion rates were 93.7, 90.9, and 91.5% for NBCA, RFA, and EVLA, respectively. NBCA-treated patients experienced the least complications, with bruising, phlebitis, and pain being the most prevalent. Quality of life improved equally in all three modalities. Conclusion  NBCA is simple to administer, safe, and effective even without compression stockings. Further studies are required to assess longer-term benefit and the effect of anticoagulation on vein obliteration.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of endovenous cyanoacrylate adhesive ablation for incompetent saphenous veins

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to assess the effectiveness, safety, and quality of care afforded by cyanoacrylate ablation (CA) vs existing options in treating great saphenous vein incompetence.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review; used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation framework; assessed the quality of randomized clinical trials using the Cochrane risk of bias tool; and performed a meta-analysis on the available comparative measurements.

RESULTS

Three comparative studies, two randomized controlled trials and one observational study comprising 1057 participants, were included for effectiveness assessment purposes. The safety assessment also included 10 case series. Available evidence allowed comparison of CA with radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) but not with other treatments. The comparative effectiveness analysis showed that whereas all three treatments reduced disease severity, none was significantly better than any other in terms of effectiveness. In terms of safety, however, CA devices gave rise to fewer adverse events and less severity at 12 months of follow-up than did EVLA or RFA. Other important advantages of CA over EVLA or RFA were linked to quality of care; patients reported less pain during intervention with CA than with RFA or EVLA devices and registered shorter intervention and recovery times. Furthermore, tumescent anesthesia and compression bandages were not necessary, making this technique more comfortable for the patients than endothermal techniques.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with EVLA and RFA, CA treatments yield comparable effectiveness outcomes and lead to less frequent and fewer mild adverse events, without difference in major adverse events. Furthermore, CA devices have advantages in terms of quality of care indicators, such as pain during intervention, treatment and recovery times, lower use of anesthesia, and zero use of compression bandages after treatment.

Treatment of a central venous perforation caused by dialysis intubation using coils and cyanoacrylate glue: A case report

Central venous catheter is one of the most commonly used vascular therapies in patients receiving hemodialysis and vascular perforation is a rare but serious complication. The present study reports on a case of a 64-year-old female who developed massive hemothorax and hemorrhagic shock after long-term dialysis due to central venous perforation during placement of the central venous catheter. This case was successfully managed by digital subtraction angiography-guided direct injection of coils and cyanoacrylate glue into the sinus tract. In addition, the literature regarding central venous perforation resulting from long-term dialysis catheters was reviewed, risk factors and prevention strategies were summarized and the advantages and disadvantages of various therapeutic approaches were compared.

Cyanoacrylate closure for peripheral veins: Consensus document of the Australasian College of Phlebology

Background

Cyanoacrylates are fast-acting adhesives used in procedural medicine including closure of superficial wounds, embolization of truncal vessels pre-operatively, vascular anomalies, visceral false aneurysms, endoleaks, gastrointestinal varices and gastrointestinal bleeding. More recently, catheter-directed cyanoacrylate adhesive closure was introduced as an alternative to endovenous thermal ablation (ETA) to occlude superficial veins of the lower limbs.

Objectives

To formulate policies for the safe and effective delivery of cyanoacrylate adhesive closure procedures in Australasia, based on current experience and evidence.

Methods

A panel of phlebologists including vascular surgeons, interventional radiologists, dermatologists and research scientists systematically reviewed the available data on cyanoacrylate products used in medicine and shared personal experience with the procedure. The reviewed material included bibliographic and biomedical data, material safety data sheets and data requested and received from manufacturers. Results and recommendations: Cyanoacrylate adhesive closure appears to be an effective treatment for saphenous reflux with occlusion rates at 36 months of 90–95%. We recommend a maximum dose of 10 mL of cyanoacrylate per treatment session. Serious complications are rare, but significant. Hypersensitivity to acrylates is reported in 2.4% of the population and is an important absolute contraindication to cyanoacrylate adhesive closure. 1 Post-procedural inflammatory reactions, including hypersensitivity-type phlebitis, occur in 10–20% of patients. 2 In the long term, cyanoacrylate adhesive closure results in foreign-body granuloma formation within 2–12 months of the procedure. We recommend against the use of cyanoacrylate adhesive closure in patients with uncontrolled inflammatory, autoimmune or granulomatous disorders (e.g. sarcoidosis). Caution should be exercised in patients with significant active systemic disease or infection and alternative therapies such as thermal ablation and foam sclerotherapy should be considered.

Conclusions

Cyanoacrylate adhesive closure appears to be an effective endovenous procedure, with short-term closure rates comparable to ETA and therefore greater efficacy than traditional surgery for treating superficial veins of the lower limbs. Ongoing data collection is required to establish the long-term safety.

European College of Phlebology guideline for truncal ablation

Background

The purpose of the guideline was to achieve consensus in the care and treatment of patients with chronic venous disease, based on current evidence.

Method

A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed, Embase, Cinahl, and the Cochrane library up until 1 February 2019. Additional relevant literature were added through checking of references. Level of evidence was graded through the GRADE scale and recommendations were concluded.

Results

For the treatment of great and small saphenous vein reflux, endovenous ablation with laser or radiofrequency was recommended in preference to surgery or foam sclerotherapy. If tributaries are to be treated it should be done in the same procedure. Treatment with mecanicochemical ablation and glue can be used but we still need long term follow up results.

Conclusion

For the treatment of truncal varicosities, endovenous ablation with laser or radiofrequency combined with phlebectomies is recommended before surgery or foam.

Ablation therapy with cyanoacrylate glue and laser for refluxing great saphenous veins - a prospective randomised study

Background: Endovenous cyanoacrylate ablation is a new technique for the treatment of clinically symptomatic venous insufficiency. The results of a prospective comparative study of cyanoacrylate glue versus endovenous laser ablation for the management of incompetent great saphenous veins are presented. Patients and methods: A total of 400 subjects were treated with cyanoacrylate ablation or endovenous laser ablation between April 2014 and April 2016. The preprocedural, procedural, postprocedural, and follow-up data were recorded and compared. Results: There were 208 procedures in cyanoacrylate ablation group (CAA) and 204 in endovenous laser ablation group (EVLA). Operative time was 13 ± 3.4 minutes in the CAA and 31.7 ± 8.8 minutes in the EVLA (< 0.001). All procedures in both groups were successful, and the target vein segments were fully occluded at the end of the procedure. Periprocedural pain was less in the CAA (< 0.001). Enduration, ecchymosis, and paresthesia rates were significantly higher in the EVLA (< 0.001). The mean length of follow-up was 14 months (range 10-16). The 3, 6 and 12 months closure rates were 97.4%, 95.6%, and 94.1% for EVLA and 98.6%, 97.1% and 96.6% for CAA respectively. In both groups, the Venous Clinical Severity Score and Chronic Venous Insufficiency Quality of Life Questionnaire with declined significantly with no difference between groups. Conclusions: Management of incompetent great saphenous veins both endovenous cyanoacrylate ablation and laser ablation results in high occlusion rates. Endovenous cyanoacrylate ablation technique is fast and simple with low periprocedural pain that does not require tumescent anesthesia and compression stockings.

Endovenous Glue-Induced Thrombosis in Nonthermal Glue Closure Therapy for Greater Saphenous Vein Insufficiency: A Single-Center Experience

A retrospective analysis of endovenous glue-closure therapy (EVGC) performed in 76 greater saphenous veins (GSVs) from February 2016 to December 2017 was conducted to assess the incidence and characteristics of endovenous glue-induced thrombosis (EGIT), a phenomenon unique to nonthermal EVGC for GSV insufficiency. Kabnick and Lawrence classifications for endovenous heat-induced thrombosis were adopted. Seven instances of EGIT were detected among 54 patients (13%), with median/mode Kabnick and Lawrence classifications of 2/2 and 4/5, respectively. EGIT resolved with observation within an average of 5.2 wk after detection (range, 2-8 wk) without deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism. EGIT was associated with significantly greater mean age (+7.75 y; P = .0308).

Twelve-month efficacy and complications of cyanoacrylate embolization compared with radiofrequency ablation for incompetent great saphenous veins

OBJECTIVE

In this study, the clinical results of radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and n-butyl-cyanoacrylate embolization (CAE) methods were compared in the treatment of incompetent great saphenous veins (GSVs).

METHODS

We analyzed retrospectively 244 patients (128 patients in the RFA group, 116 patients in the CAE group) with incompetent GSVs who were treated with RFA and CAE according to the patients' choice between June 2013 and June 2016. All patients were thoroughly examined preoperatively and at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after the operation, and the clinical results and the quality of life were evaluated. Color Doppler ultrasound (CDUS) results were compared between two groups after the operation and at 12 months. Complete vein occlusion was defined as the success of the treatment.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference between patients treated with RFA or CAE in terms of demographic and clinical features. In CDUS after operation, total occlusion was detected in the saphenous vein in both groups. At the 12-month CDUS, complete occlusion of the GSV was observed in 99.5% of the CAE group and 96.6% of the RFA group (P = .072). Skin burn, which we consider a major complication, occurred only in one patient. No other major complications were seen in either group. Severe pain, ecchymosis, and sensitivity were the most common of the side effects, and these were significantly higher in RFA group than in CAE group. Severe pain occurred in 12.5% of the RFA patients and 4.3% of the CAE patients (P = .042), ecchymosis occurred in 20.3% of the RFA patients and 12% of the CAE patients (P = .044), and sensitivity occurred in 21.9% of the RFA patients and 12.1% of the CAE patients (P = .038), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the present data, our findings suggest that CAE is as effective as RFA ablation with similar rates of successful occlusion and can be associated with less pain and fewer complications than RFA; it also may yield better patient comfort. The current results should be verified with further randomized, controlled trials with longer term follow-up and larger patient groups.