Abstract
Objective
To systematically review all available English literature on mechanochemical endovenous ablation and to report on the anatomical, technical, and clinical success.
Methods
A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library on mechanochemical endovenous ablation for the treatment of insufficient great and/or small saphenous vein. Methodological quality of the included studies was evaluated using the MINORS score. The primary outcome measure was anatomical success, defined as closure of the treated vein on follow-up duplex ultrasound imaging. Secondary outcomes were technical and clinical success, and major complications defined as deep venous thrombosis, pulmonary embolisms or paresthesia.
Results
The literature search identified 759 records, of which 13 were included, describing 10 unique cohorts. A total of 1521 veins (1267 great saphenous vein and 254 small saphenous vein) were included, with cohort sizes ranging from 30 to 570 veins. The pooled anatomical success rate after short-term follow up was 92% (95% CI 90–94%) (n = 1314 veins). After 6 and 12 months these numbers were 92% (95% CI 88–95%) (n = 284) and 91% (95% CI 86–94%) (n = 228), respectively. The long-term anatomical success rates at 2 and 3 years were 91% (95% CI 85–95%) (n = 136) and 87% (95% CI 75–94%) (n = 48), respectively. Major complications and especially nerve injury were very rare (≤ 0.2%). All studies were of moderate or good quality using the MINORS scoring scale.
Conclusions
Mechanochemical endovenous ablation using the ClariVein in combination with liquid sclerosant is associated with an anatomical success rate ranging from 87% to 92% and good clinical success. To date, no randomized controlled trials are available studying the anatomical success after mechanochemical ablation, compared to the endothermal ablation. The risk of major complications is very low after the procedure.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.