SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Damar Cerrahi Dergisi / 2014 / Cilt: 23 - Sayı: 3

Mechano-Chemical Endovenous Ablation of Great Saphenous Vein InsufŞciency: Two-Year Results

Kaan KIRALİ
Sabit SARIKAYA
Murat Bülent RABUŞ
Ebuzer AYDIN
Davut ÇEKMECELİOĞLU
Mehmet DEDEMOĞLU
Yücel ÖZEN
Pages
176–179
Publication Date
2022-10-10
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The venous clinic severity score was found as 3.2 (interquartile range: IQR: 2-6) after 6 months, 1.2 (IQR: 1-3, p

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: The objective of this study is to evaluate the reliability and 2-year results of ClariVein® device used in mechanochemical endovenous ablation of great saphenous vein (GSV).
📊
Key Findings & Data:Material and Methods: In our clinic, 63 patients with GSV insufficiency had been treated using ClariVein® device and polidocanol for 2 years.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The venous clinic severity score was found as 3.2 (interquartile range: IQR: 2-6) after 6 months, 1.2 (IQR: 1-3, p
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Objective: The objective of this study is to evaluate the reliability and 2-year results of ClariVein® device used in mechanochemical endovenous ablation of great saphenous vein (GSV). Material and Methods: In our clinic, 63 patients with GSV insufficiency had been treated using ClariVein® device and polidocanol for 2 years. Both legs were treated in 10 of these patients. The anatomical and clinic success were assessed by Doppler ultrasonography 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years later. Results: The implementation success rate of the technique was 98%. The anatomical success was found as 94% at the end of 6 months, 95% at the end of 1 year, and 95% at the end of 2 years. The venous clinic severity score was found as 3.2 (interquartile range: IQR: 2-6) after 6 months, 1.2 (IQR: 1-3, p

Özet

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı mekanokimyasal endovenöz ablasyonda kullandığımız ClariVein® cihazının büyük safen vende (BSV) güvenilirliğini ve iki yıllık sonuçlarını değerlendirmektir. Gereç ve Yöntemler: Kliniğimizde iki yıl içinde 63 hasta BSV yetmezliği nedeniyle ClariVein® cihazı ve polidokanol kullanılarak tedavi edildi. Bu hastaların 10 tanesinin iki bacağına da işlem uygulandı. Anatomik ve klinik başarı 6 ay, 1 yıl ve 2 yıl sonunda yapılan Doppler ultrasonografilerle değerlendirildi. Bulgular: Tekniğin uygulama başarısı %98 idi. Anatomik başarı Doppler öl- çümlerinde 6. ayda %94, 1. yılda %95, 2. yılda %95 bulundu. Venöz klinik şiddet skoru (VCSS) tedavi öncesine göre 3,2 (interquartile range: IQR: 2-6) 6. ayda 1,2 (IQR: 1-3, p

🔖

Cite This Article

KIRALİ, K., SARIKAYA, S., RABUŞ, M. B., AYDIN, E., ÇEKMECELİOĞLU, D., DEDEMOĞLU, M., ÖZEN, Y. (2022). Mechano-Chemical Endovenous Ablation of Great Saphenous Vein InsufŞciency: Two-Year Results. Damar Cerrahi Dergisi, Cilt: 23 - Sayı: 3, 176–179. https://ajindex.com/articles/486736

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (11)

  1. Callam MJ. Epidemiology of varicose veins. Br J Surg 1994;81(2):167-73
  2. Stirling M, Shortell CK. Endovascular treatment of varicose veins. Semin Vascular Surg 2006;19(2):109-15
  3. Van Den Bos RR, Neumann M, De Roos KP, Nijsten T. Endovenous laser ablation-induced complications: review of literature and new cases. Dermatol Surg 2009;35(8):1206-14. 4. van Eekeren RR, Boersma D, Elias S, Holewijn S, Werson DA, de Vries JP, et al. Endovenous mechanochemical ablation of great saphenous vein incompetence using the ClariVein device: a safety study. J Endovasc Ther 2011;18(3):328-34 5. Elias S, Raines JK. Mechanochemical tumescentless endovenousablation: final results of the initial clinical trial. Phlebology 2012;27(2): 67-72
  4. Tellings SS, Ceulen RP, Sommer A. Surgery and endovenous techniques for the treatment of small saphenous varicose veins: a review of the literature. Phlebology 2011;26(5):179- 84
  5. Rasmussen LH, Lawaetz M, Bjoern L, Vennits B, Blemings A, Eklof B. Randomised clinical trial comparing endovenous laser ablation, radiofrequency ablation, foam sclerotherapy and surgical stripping for great saphenous varicose veins. Br J Surg 2011;98(8):1079-87
  6. Smith PC. Chronic venous disease treated by ultrasound guided foam sclerotherapy. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 2006;32(5):577-83
  7. Hamel-Desnos C, Allaert FA. Liquid versus foam sclerotherapy. Phlebology 2009;24(6): 240-6
  8. Kendler M, Averbeck M, Simon JC, Ziemer M. Histology of saphenous veins after treatment with the ClariVein devicedan ex-vivo experiment. J Dtsch Dermatol Ges 2013;11(4):348- 52. 11. van Eekeren RR, Boersma D, Elias S, Holewijn S, Werson DA, de Vries JP, et al. Endovenous mechanochemical ablation of great saphenous vein incompetence using the ClariVein device: a safety study. J Endovasc Ther 2011;18(3):328-34
  9. Van Den Bos RR, Neumann M, De Roos KP, Nijsten T. Endovenous laser ablation-induced complications: review of the literature and new cases. Dermatol Surg 2009;35(8):1206-14
  10. Proebstle TM, Lehr HA, Kargl A, EspinolaKlein C, Rother W, Bethge S, et al. Endovenous treatment of the greater saphenous vein with a 940-nm diode laser: thrombotic occlusion after endoluminal thermal damage by laser-generated steam bubbles. J Vasc Surg 2002;35(4):729-36
  11. Schmedt CG, Sroka R, Steckmeier S, Meissner OA, Babaryka G, Hunger K, et al. Investigation on radiofrequency and laser (980 nm) effects after endoluminal treatment of saphenous vein insufficiency in an ex-vivo model