search
Back to results

Radiofrequency Ablation vs. Laser Ablation of the Incompetent Small Saphenous Vein

Primary Purpose

Chronic Venous Insufficiency

Status
Terminated
Phase
Phase 4
Locations
United States
Study Type
Interventional
Intervention
Ablation of the incompetent small saphenous vein
Sponsored by
Virginia Commonwealth University
About
Eligibility
Locations
Arms
Outcomes
Full info

About this trial

This is an interventional treatment trial for Chronic Venous Insufficiency focused on measuring chronic venous insufficiency, varicose vein, small saphenous vein

Eligibility Criteria

18 Years - undefined (Adult, Older Adult)All SexesDoes not accept healthy volunteers

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Patients with symptomatic chronic venous insufficiency.
  • Patients in whom endovenous thermal ablation is clinically indicated.
  • Have previously undergone at least 6 weeks of conservative treatment with compression stockings (unless they have venous ulcers, recurrent phlebitis, or bleeding varices).
  • Have symptoms secondary to Small Saphenous Vein insufficiency defined as reverse flow in the saphenous vein >0.5 seconds after calf compression or while standing.

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Have previously undergone surgery, EVTA, or phlebectomy in that extremity (exclusive of spider vein injections or other cosmetic surface procedures).
  • Have a history of Deep Venous Thrombosis (DVT).
  • Have a history of hypercoaguability disorder.
  • Are pregnant or breastfeeding.
  • Are nonambulatory.

Sites / Locations

  • Virginia Commonwealth University

Arms of the Study

Arm 1

Arm 2

Arm Type

Active Comparator

Active Comparator

Arm Label

Radiofrequency Ablation

Laser Ablation

Arm Description

Device: ClosureFast radiofrequency catheter (VNUS Medical Technologies Inc, San Jose, CA). Patients will have the intervention, ablation of the incompetent small saphenous vein, using this device.

Device: EVLT 980nm diode laser system (Angiodynamics, Queensbury, NY). Patients will have the intervention, ablation of the incompetent small saphenous vein, using this device.

Outcomes

Primary Outcome Measures

Number of Participants With Recurrent Clinical Symptoms of an Incompetent Small Saphenous Vein After Treatment.

Secondary Outcome Measures

Incidence Rate of Acute Complications

Full Information

First Posted
September 2, 2014
Last Updated
September 11, 2018
Sponsor
Virginia Commonwealth University
search

1. Study Identification

Unique Protocol Identification Number
NCT02248740
Brief Title
Radiofrequency Ablation vs. Laser Ablation of the Incompetent Small Saphenous Vein
Official Title
Radiofrequency Ablation vs. Laser Ablation of the Incompetent Small Saphenous Vein: A Prospective Randomized Trial
Study Type
Interventional

2. Study Status

Record Verification Date
September 2018
Overall Recruitment Status
Terminated
Why Stopped
Lack of enrollment
Study Start Date
September 2008 (undefined)
Primary Completion Date
March 29, 2017 (Actual)
Study Completion Date
March 29, 2017 (Actual)

3. Sponsor/Collaborators

Responsible Party, by Official Title
Sponsor
Name of the Sponsor
Virginia Commonwealth University

4. Oversight

Data Monitoring Committee
No

5. Study Description

Brief Summary
The aim of this study is to perform a randomized, prospective trial comparing the two current methods of treatment for chronic venous insufficiency related to the Small Saphenous Vein (SSV) to evaluate complications and outcomes for each method, and ultimately, to see if one is superior to the other.
Detailed Description
Chronic venous insufficiency (CVI) is estimated to affect 25 million Americans. This condition leads to varicose veins, aching, fatigue, swelling, ulcerations, and bleeding in the lower extremities. The second most common cause is a refluxing or incompetent Small Saphenous Vein (SSV). This condition results in pooling of deoxygenated blood in the lower extremities rather than successful transport of the blood back to the heart and lungs. The historical treatment has been to surgically remove or 'strip' the SSV so that blood is rerouted through the healthier deep veins. A less invasive treatment option, Endovenous Thermal Ablation, has emerged over the last decade and has virtually replaced stripping. This involves advancing a catheter under ultrasound guidance through the SSV and then advancing a laser fiber or radiofrequency probe through the catheter. These devices then produce the energy to destroy the vein as the catheters are slowly pulled back. While both radiofrequency ablation and laser ablation are accepted treatments, neither technology has been definitively proved to have fewer complications or superior results. This is in part because very few practices have the ability to make a head to head comparison between the two technologies and must choose one or the other secondary to financial constraints. The aim of this study is to perform a randomized prospective trial comparing the two modalities so that more definitive information to evaluate complications and outcome can be obtained and then recommendations on which, if either, technology is superior can be made.

6. Conditions and Keywords

Primary Disease or Condition Being Studied in the Trial, or the Focus of the Study
Chronic Venous Insufficiency
Keywords
chronic venous insufficiency, varicose vein, small saphenous vein

7. Study Design

Primary Purpose
Treatment
Study Phase
Phase 4
Interventional Study Model
Parallel Assignment
Masking
None (Open Label)
Allocation
Randomized
Enrollment
36 (Actual)

8. Arms, Groups, and Interventions

Arm Title
Radiofrequency Ablation
Arm Type
Active Comparator
Arm Description
Device: ClosureFast radiofrequency catheter (VNUS Medical Technologies Inc, San Jose, CA). Patients will have the intervention, ablation of the incompetent small saphenous vein, using this device.
Arm Title
Laser Ablation
Arm Type
Active Comparator
Arm Description
Device: EVLT 980nm diode laser system (Angiodynamics, Queensbury, NY). Patients will have the intervention, ablation of the incompetent small saphenous vein, using this device.
Intervention Type
Procedure
Intervention Name(s)
Ablation of the incompetent small saphenous vein
Intervention Description
For each patient, the Small Saphenous Vein (SSV) will be accessed from the midcalf. After liberal use of tumescent anesthesia, ablation of the incompetent small saphenous vein will be performed. Half the patients will have this procedure performed using the Laser Ablation device and half will be performed using the Radiofrequency Ablation device. They will be randomly assigned to treatment.
Primary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
Number of Participants With Recurrent Clinical Symptoms of an Incompetent Small Saphenous Vein After Treatment.
Time Frame
At 10 years after treatment.
Secondary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
Incidence Rate of Acute Complications
Time Frame
1 and 6 weeks post intervention.
Other Pre-specified Outcome Measures:
Title
Incidence of Pain and Bruising
Description
Measurement of pain will be performed by patient solicitation of pain rating on a scale of 0 to 10. Bruising will be measured on a scale of 0-10, determined by a consensus of all study investigators.
Time Frame
During Intervention and post procedure recovery period in clinic, an expected average of 2 hours.

10. Eligibility

Sex
All
Minimum Age & Unit of Time
18 Years
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
No
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria: Patients with symptomatic chronic venous insufficiency. Patients in whom endovenous thermal ablation is clinically indicated. Have previously undergone at least 6 weeks of conservative treatment with compression stockings (unless they have venous ulcers, recurrent phlebitis, or bleeding varices). Have symptoms secondary to Small Saphenous Vein insufficiency defined as reverse flow in the saphenous vein >0.5 seconds after calf compression or while standing. Exclusion Criteria: Have previously undergone surgery, EVTA, or phlebectomy in that extremity (exclusive of spider vein injections or other cosmetic surface procedures). Have a history of Deep Venous Thrombosis (DVT). Have a history of hypercoaguability disorder. Are pregnant or breastfeeding. Are nonambulatory.
Overall Study Officials:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Malcolm Sydnor, MD
Organizational Affiliation
Virginia Commonwealth University
Official's Role
Principal Investigator
Facility Information:
Facility Name
Virginia Commonwealth University
City
Richmond
State/Province
Virginia
ZIP/Postal Code
23298
Country
United States

12. IPD Sharing Statement

Learn more about this trial

Radiofrequency Ablation vs. Laser Ablation of the Incompetent Small Saphenous Vein

We'll reach out to this number within 24 hrs