Retrospective Review of Saphenous Vein Incompetence: Venaseal Versus Endovenous Thermal Ablation

Last updated: October 1, 2019
Sponsor: Lake Washington Vascular
Overall Status: Completed

Phase

N/A

Condition

Varicose Veins

Vascular Diseases

Stasis Dermatitis

Treatment

N/A

Clinical Study ID

NCT04006184
GG2019/01
  • Ages > 18
  • All Genders

Study Summary

This study is a retrospective, chart review of treatment of patients with symptomatic varicose veins. Treated limbs must have the Great Saphenous Vein and/or Small Saphenous Vein treated with either cyanoacrylate closure (VenaSeal) or Endothermal Ablation (either Radiofrequency Ablation or Endovenous Laser Ablation).

Eligibility Criteria

Inclusion

Inclusion Criteria:

  1. Limb with saphenous vein incompetence, treated with one of the following: VenaSeal ™ Endovenous Laser Ablation Radiofrequency Ablation

  2. CEAP Clinical Class between 2-5

  3. Limb treated from October 1st, 2015-present

  4. At least 2 months of follow-up post index procedure

  5. Treatment of either the great saphenous vein (GSV), the small saphenous vein (SSV), orboth. Treatment of accessory saphenous veins (ASV) is allowed as long as either theGSV, SSV, or both the GSV and SSV were treated as well in that limb at the indexprocedure.

Exclusion

Exclusion Criteria:

  1. Limb treatment of the accessory saphenous vein (ASV) without concomitant greatsaphenous vein (GSV) and/or small saphenous vein (SSV) treatment

  2. Limb treatment for reasons other than symptomatic varicose veins

  3. Limbs without follow-up information at least 2 months following the index procedure

  4. Subjects who participated in another clinical trial as part of their saphenous veintreatment

  5. Investigator decision (concurrent condition that would make inclusion inappropriate,protected subject population) -

Study Design

Total Participants: 547
Study Start date:
June 14, 2019
Estimated Completion Date:
August 30, 2019

Study Description

This single site, retrospective, comparison study aims to review up to 400 treated limbs with symptomatic varicose veins to compare the need for/utilization of adjunctive phlebectomy performed as a concomitant or staged procedure in conjunction with either cyanoacrylate closure versus endothermal ablation of incompetent saphenous veins through 6 months of the index procedure. The overall cost of treatment for both groups will be compared.

Some of the secondary aims of this study include:

  1. To assess changes in Clinical, Etiology, Anatomy, and Pathology (CEAP) clinical class after completion of treatment.

  2. To assess changes in revised Venous Clinical Severity Score (rVCSS) and compare the two groups.

  3. To assess the need for adjunctive therapies.

  4. To record and compare retrospectively the adverse events between the two groups.

Connect with a study center

  • Lake Washington Vascular, PLLC

    Bellevue, Washington 98004
    United States

    Site Not Available

Map preview placeholder

Not the study for you?

Let us help you find the best match. Sign up as a volunteer and receive email notifications when clinical trials are posted in the medical category of interest to you.