跳至主要内容
临床试验/NCT02588911
NCT02588911已完成不适用

Randomised Trial of Radiofrequency Ablation vs Conventional Surgery for Superficial Venous Insufficiency: if You Don't Tell, They Won't Know

Nelson Wolosker1 个研究点 分布在 1 个国家目标入组 18 人开始时间: 2013年11月1日最近更新:
适应症
干预措施

试验速览

阶段
不适用
状态
已完成
发起方
入组人数
18
试验地点
1
主要终点
Change in presence of complications

研究概览

简要总结

The current study was a double blind randomised controlled trial that compared radiofrequency ablation (RFA) versus conventional surgery (CS) in patients who served as their own controls and who had intact great saphenous veins (GSVs).

详细描述

Individuals with symptomatic varicose veins and bilateral GSV insufficiency confirmed by duplex ultrasound examination who were candidates for conventional vein stripping were eligible for inclusion in the study. A total of 18 patients entered the trial. As per protocol, each patient was treated with RFA in one leg and CS on the contralateral limb. Randomisation was performed preoperatively using a randomisation table. Patients were not advised of the treatment allocation in order to ensure that this trial was carried out in a blinded fashion. All operations were performed under regional anaesthesia by the same surgical team, skilled in the management of venous disease with extensive expertise in both techniques. Phlebectomy of varicosities was not concomitantly performed.

The independent observer physician not involved in the original operation, the patient, and the duplex ultrasonographer were not aware of the treatment performed in each case and the surgeon was not involved in outcome assessment.

CS. Patients underwent standard procedure of cranial ligation of the GSV and branches of the sapheno-femoral junction (SFJ) using a groin crease incision and stripping of the GSV from SFJ to ankle level, using a vein stripper that was brought out through a small incision near the medial malleolus.

RFA. The procedure was performed under ultrasound guidance. The GSV proximal to the medial malleolus was cannulated with a 7F sheath using surgical cutdown. The tip of the radiofrequency catheter was placed at least 2 cm distal to the SFJ or just distal to the superficial epigastric vein orifice. Patients received tumescent infiltration with cold normal saline (0.9%) circumferentially around the GSV within its enveloping fascia and along the entire length of the treated vein. This was to prevent nerve injury and thermal injury to the skin. Then the catheter was gradually withdrawn according to the device manufacturer's recommendations. The technique consisted of controlled segmental heating of the GSV, using a catheter with a 7-cm heating element (Closure™ system, VNUS Medical Technologies, Inc., San Jose, California, USA). The temperature was maintained at 120° C per segment using a standard time. The thermoablation continued until the catheter tip reached just below the knee. Immediately following treatment with RFA, intraoperative ultrasound imaging was used to confirm shrinkage of the vein.

For limbs operated with the radiofrequency technique, a groin crease incision was made similar to the contralateral side, but with no manipulation of the SFJ. The incision proximal to the medial malleolus was used for sheath insertion. To ensure that the independent observer physician not involved in the original operation, the patient, and the duplex ultrasonographer were not made aware of the treatment done, both incisions were performed on both legs.

研究设计

研究类型
Interventional
分配方式
Randomized
干预模型
Parallel
主要目的
Treatment
盲法
Double (Participant, Outcomes Assessor)

入排标准

年龄范围
33 Years 至 76 Years(Adult, Older Adult)
性别
All
接受健康志愿者
否

入选标准

  • •Age between 18 and 60 years
  • •Clinical, etiologic, anatomic, pathophysiologic (CEAP): clinical grades 2 to 5 (C2-5), primary (Ep), superficial (As) and reflux only (Pr)
  • •Duplex scan confirmed primary bilateral GSV insufficiency requiring surgery (insufficiency with reverse venous flow was regarded significant if persisting more than 0.5 seconds in a standing position)
  • •Duplex scan confirmed suitability for RFA (see

排除标准

  • •Patients able to give informed consent
  • •Exclusion Criteria:
  • •Varicose veins without GSV insufficiency on duplex scan
  • •Previous varicose vein surgery
  • •Associated small saphenous vein reflux, duplication of the GSV at the SFJ, deep venous insufficiency or previous DVT on duplex scan
  • •GSV diameter <3 mm or >12 mm in the supine position
  • •Thrombus in the GSV
  • •Patients with a pacemaker or internal defibrillator
  • •Concomitant peripheral arterial disease (ankle-brachial pressure index of <0.9)
  • •Patients on oral anticoagulants
  • •Patients with high blood pressure not controlled by medication
  • •Patients with known thrombophilia, cancer or lupus
  • •Pregnancy

研究组 & 干预措施

Conventional Surgery

Active Comparator

Limb with GSV insufficiency in the same patient, randomised to conventional surgery

干预措施: Conventional Surgery (Procedure)

Radiofrequency Ablation

Active Comparator

Limb with GSV insufficiency in the same patient, randomised to radiofrequency ablation

干预措施: Radiofrequency Ablation (Procedure)

结局指标

主要结局

Change in presence of complications

时间窗: One month, six months and 12 months after surgery

Duplex ultrasound scan was used to evaluate the presence or absence of complications such as deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and lymphocele.

Change in intensity of hyper pigmentation using a scale of 0 to 10

时间窗: One week, one month and six months after surgery

Patients and physicians were oriented to indicate their subjective perception of intensity of hyperpigmentation on a scale of 0 (no complaint/discomfort) to 10 (maximal complaint/discomfort).

Change in extension of hematoma using a scale of 0 to 10

时间窗: One week, one month and six months after surgery

Patients and physicians were oriented to indicate their subjective perception of extension of hematoma on a scale of 0 (no complaint/discomfort) to 10 (maximal complaint/discomfort).

Change in aesthetic results using a scale of 0 to 10

时间窗: One week, one month and six months after surgery

Patients and physicians were oriented to indicate their subjective perception of aesthetic results on a scale of 0 (unaesthetic) to 10 (excellent results).

Change in intensity of skin burns using a scale of 0 to 10

时间窗: One week, one month and six months after surgery

Physicians were asked to inform intensity of skin burns on a scale of 0 (no complaint/discomfort) to 10 (maximal complaint/discomfort).

Change in presence of sensitivity alteration

时间窗: One week, one month and six months after surgery

Patients were asked to indicate the presence or absence of sensitivity alteration.

Change in presence of thrombophlebitis

时间窗: One week, one month and six months after surgery

Physicians were asked to inform the presence or absence of thrombophlebitis.

Change in presence of resection or occlusion of the great saphenous vein

时间窗: One month, six months and 12 months after surgery

Duplex ultrasound scan was used to evaluate the presence or absence of resection or occlusion (success rate) of the great saphenous vein.

Change in presence of reflux in the sapheno-femoral junction and in the great saphenous vein

时间窗: One month, six months and 12 months after surgery

Duplex ultrasound scan was used to evaluate the presence or absence of reflux in the sapheno-femoral junction and in the great saphenous vein

Change in pain levels using a scale of 0 to 10

时间窗: One week, one month and six months after surgery

Patients were asked to indicate pain levels on a scale of 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst imaginable pain).

次要结局

未报告次要终点

研究者

发起方
Nelson Wolosker
申办方类型
Other
责任方
Sponsor Investigator
主要研究者

Nelson Wolosker

MD, PhD

Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein

研究点 (1)

Loading locations...

相似试验