Dataset Information

Mechanochemical ablation versus cyanoacrylate adhesive for the treatment of varicose veins: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Thermal ablation techniques have become the first-line treatment of truncal veins in the management of chronic venous disease (CVD). Despite excellent outcomes, these methods are often associated with pain; generally due to their use of heat and the necessity of fluid infiltration around the vein. More recently, novel non-thermal techniques, such as mechanochemical ablation (MOCA) and cyanoacrylate adhesive (CAE) have been developed to overcome these unwelcome effects. So far, the novel techniques have been found to have similar efficacy to thermal methods, yet no direct comparisons between the non-thermal treatment techniques have been conducted to date, giving rise to this study. METHODS/DESIGN:This is a prospective, multicentre, randomised clinical trial, recruiting patients with truncal saphenous incompetence. Patients will be randomised to undergo either MOCA or CAE truncal ablation, followed by treatment of any varicosities. All patients will be required to wear compression stockings for 4 days post intervention. The primary outcome measure is the pain score immediately following completion of truncal ablation, measured by a 100-mm Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). The secondary outcomes are entire treatment pain scores, clinical scores, quality of life scores, occlusion rates, time to return to usual activities/work at 2 weeks, 3, 6 and 12 months. Re-intervention rate will be considered from the third month. Cost-effectiveness will be assessed for each intervention at 12 months. The study is powered to detect a mean 10-mm difference in maximum pain score. Allowing for loss to follow-up, the total target recruitment is 180 patients. DISCUSSION:The study will be the first study to compare MOCA against CAE and is designed to determine which method causes less pain. Completion of this study is expected to be the end of 2019. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov, ID: NCT03392753 . Registered on 17 November 2017.

SUBMITTER: Belramman A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6081848 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Mechanochemical ablation versus cyanoacrylate adhesive for the treatment of varicose veins: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

Belramman Amjad A Bootun Roshan R Tang Tjun Yip TY Lane Tristan R A TRA Davies Alun H AH

Trials 20180807 1

<h4>Background</h4>Thermal ablation techniques have become the first-line treatment of truncal veins in the management of chronic venous disease (CVD). Despite excellent outcomes, these methods are often associated with pain; generally due to their use of heat and the necessity of fluid infiltration around the vein. More recently, novel non-thermal techniques, such as mechanochemical ablation (MOCA) and cyanoacrylate adhesive (CAE) have been developed to overcome these unwelcome effects. So far, ...[more]

PMID: 30086774

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundEndovenous thermal techniques, such as endovenous laser ablation (EVLA), are the recommended treatment for truncal varicose veins. However, a disadvantage of thermal techniques is that it requires the administration of tumescent anaesthesia, which can be uncomfortable. Non-thermal, non-tumescent techniques, such as mechanochemical ablation (MOCA) have potential benefits. MOCA combines physical damage to endothelium using a rotating wire, with the infusion of a liquid sclerosant. Preliminary experiences with MOCA showed good results and less post-procedural pain.Methods/designThe Laser Ablation versus Mechanochemical Ablation (LAMA) trial is a single-centre randomised controlled trial in which 140 patients will be randomly allocated to EVLA or MOCA. All patients with primary truncal superficial venous insufficiency (SVI) who meet the eligibility criteria will be invited to participate in this trial. The primary outcomes are intra-procedural pain and technical efficacy at 1 year, defined as complete occlusion of target vein segment and assessed using duplex ultrasound. Secondary outcomes are post-procedural pain, analgesia use, procedure time, clinical severity, generic and disease-specific quality of life, bruising, complications, satisfaction, cosmesis, time taken to return to daily activities and/or work, and cost-effectiveness analysis following EVLA or MOCA. Both groups will be evaluated on an intention-to-treat basis.DiscussionThe aim of the LAMA trial is to establish whether MOCA is superior to the current first-line treatment, EVLA. The two main hypotheses are that MOCA may cause less initial pain and disability allowing a more acceptable treatment with an enhanced recovery. The second hypothesis is that this may come at a cost of decreased efficacy, which may lead to increased recurrence and affect longer term quality of life, increasing the requirement for secondary procedures.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02627846 , registered 8 December 2015 EudraCT number: 2015-000730-30 REC ref: 15/YH/0207 R&D ref: R1788.

Project description:ImportanceEndovenous thermal ablations (ETAs) are recommended as first-line treatment for truncal vein reflux, have a short recovery time, and are cost-effective. However, ETAs are associated with discomfort during tumescent anesthesia infiltration. To minimize discomfort, nonthermal, nontumescent ablation techniques had emerged in the form of mechanochemical ablation (MOCA) and cyanoacrylate adhesive injection (CAE).ObjectiveTo assess pain scores immediately after truncal ablation using a 100-mm visual analog scale and 10-point number scale to compare pain-related outcomes following mechanochemical ablation vs cyanoacrylate adhesive treatment.Design, setting, and participantsThe Multicenter Randomized II Clinical Trial Comparing Mechanochemical Ablation vs Cyanoacrylate Adhesive for the Treatment of Primary Truncal Saphenous Veins Incompetence study was a prospective multicenter randomized clinical trial conducted at 3 sites between November 2017 and January 2020. Inclusion criteria were primary great or small saphenous varicose veins; exclusion criteria included recurrent varicose veins, current deep venous thrombosis, or serious arterial disease. There were 392 participants screened, 225 were excluded, and 167 participants underwent randomization. Four participants did not receive allocated intervention and were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. Follow-up took place at 2 weeks, and 3, 6, and 12 months.InterventionsPatients with primary truncal vein incompetence were randomized to receive either MOCA or CAE.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome measure was pain score immediately after completing truncal ablation using a 100-mm visual analog scale (VAS) and a 10-point number scale. Secondary outcome measures included degree of ecchymosis, occlusion rates, clinical severity, and generic and disease-specific quality of life (QoL) scores.ResultsOf 167 study participants, 99 (59.3%) were women, and the mean (SD) age was 56 (15.8) years. Overall, 155 truncal veins treated (92.8%) were great saphenous veins. Demographic data and baseline status were comparable between treatment groups. A total of 73 patients (47%) underwent adjunctive treatment of varicosities. Overall median (IQR) maximum pain score after truncal treatment was 23 mm (10-44) on the VAS and 3 (2-5) on the number scale, showing no significant difference in median (IQR) pain measured by VAS (MOCA, 24 [11.5-44.7] mm vs CAE, 20 [9.0-42.0] mm; P = .23) or by number scale (MOCA, 4 [2-5] vs CAE, 3 [2-4]; P = .18). Both groups demonstrated significant and comparable improvement in clinical severity, generic and disease-specific QoL scores, and complete occlusion rates. Four patients treated with CAE developed minor complications (superficial thrombophlebitis and thrombus extensions).Conclusions and relevanceTo our knowledge, this was the first randomized clinical trial directly comparing nontumescent ablation techniques. The study demonstrated that the MOCA and CAE techniques have a similar periprocedural pain score.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03392753.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Varicose veins are a common problem with no approved medical therapies. Although it is believed that varicose vein pathogenesis is multifactorial, there is limited understanding of the genetic and environmental factors that contribute to their formation. Large-scale studies of risk factors for varicose veins may highlight important aspects of pathophysiology and identify groups at increased risk for disease. METHODS:We applied machine learning to agnostically search for risk factors of varicose veins in 493?519 individuals in the UK Biobank. Predictors were further studied with univariable and multivariable Cox regression analyses (2441 incident events). A genome-wide association study of varicose veins was also performed among 337?536 unrelated individuals (9577 cases) of white British descent, followed by expression quantitative loci and pathway analyses. Because height emerged as a new candidate risk factor, we performed mendelian randomization analyses to assess a potential causal role for height in varicose vein development. RESULTS:Machine learning confirmed several known (age, sex, obesity, pregnancy, history of deep vein thrombosis) and identified several new risk factors for varicose vein disease, including height. After adjustment for traditional risk factors in Cox regression, greater height remained independently associated with varicose veins (hazard ratio for upper versus lower quartile, 1.74; 95% CI, 1.51-2.01; P<0.0001). A genome-wide association study identified 30 new genome-wide significant loci, identifying pathways involved in vascular development and skeletal/limb biology. Mendelian randomization analysis provided evidence that increased height is causally related to varicose veins (inverse-variance weighted: odds ratio, 1.26; P=2.07×10-16). CONCLUSIONS:Using data from nearly a half-million individuals, we present a comprehensive genetic and epidemiological study of varicose veins. We identified novel clinical and genetic risk factors that provide pathophysiological insights and could help future improvements of treatment of varicose vein disease.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Atrial fibrillation is the commonest arrhythmia which raises the risk of heart failure, thromboembolic stroke, morbidity and death. Pharmacological treatments of this condition are focused on heart rate control, rhythm control and reduction in risk of stroke. Selective ablation of cardiac tissues resulting in isolation of areas causing atrial fibrillation is another treatment strategy which can be delivered by two minimally invasive interventions: percutaneous catheter ablation and thoracoscopic surgical ablation. The main purpose of this trial is to compare the effectiveness and safety of these two interventions. METHODS/DESIGN:Catheter Ablation versus Thoracoscopic Surgical Ablation in Long Standing Persistent Atrial Fibrillation (CASA-AF) is a prospective, multi-centre, randomised controlled trial within three NHS tertiary cardiovascular centres specialising in treatment of atrial fibrillation. Eligible adults (n?=?120) with symptomatic, long-standing, persistent atrial fibrillation will be randomly allocated to either catheter ablation or thoracoscopic ablation in a 1:1 ratio. Pre-determined lesion sets will be delivered in each treatment arm with confirmation of appropriate conduction block. All patients will have an implantable loop recorder (ILR) inserted subcutaneously immediately following ablation to enable continuous heart rhythm monitoring for at least 12 months. The devices will be programmed to detect episodes of atrial fibrillation and atrial tachycardia ??30 s in duration. The patients will be followed for 12 months, completing appropriate clinical assessments and questionnaires every 3 months. The ILR data will be wirelessly transmitted daily and evaluated every month for the duration of the follow-up. The primary endpoint in the study is freedom from atrial fibrillation and atrial tachycardia at the end of the follow-up period. DISCUSSION:The CASA-AF Trial is a National Institute for Health Research-funded study that will provide first-class evidence on the comparative efficacy, safety and cost-effectiveness of thoracoscopic surgical ablation and conventional percutaneous catheter ablation for long-standing persistent atrial fibrillation. In addition, the results of the trial will provide information on the effects on patients' quality of life. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ISRCTN Registry, ISRCTN18250790 . Registered on 24 April 2015.

Dataset Information

Mechanochemical ablation versus cyanoacrylate adhesive for the treatment of varicose veins: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

Publications

Mechanochemical ablation versus cyanoacrylate adhesive for the treatment of varicose veins: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets