Purpose: To report the midterm results of mechanochemical ablation (MOCA) for treating great saphenous vein (GSV) insufficiency. Methods: In a 1-year period, 85 consecutive patients (median age 51.4 years; 71 women) undergoing MOCA with polidocanol in 104 limbs were enrolled in a prospective registry. The patients were evaluated at baseline and during follow-up (4 weeks and 1, 2, and 3 years) using duplex ultrasound, the CEAP (clinical, etiologic, anatomic and pathophysiologic) classification, the Venous Clinical Severity Score (VCSS), the RAND Short Form 36-Item Health Survey (RAND-SF36), and the Aberdeen Varicose Vein Questionnaire (AVVQ). Primary outcome measures were clinical and anatomic success. Secondary outcome measures included general and disease-specific quality of life and reinterventions. Results: Technical success (99%) was achieved in all but 1 patient in whom technical problems with the device led to conversion to another method for treatment of 2 limbs. After a median follow-up of 36 months (interquartile range 12.5, 46.3), recanalization occurred in 15 (15%) of 102 successfully treated vein segments. Anatomic success was 92%, 90%, and 87% after 1, 2, and 3 years, respectively. The VCSS improved at all time intervals compared to the preprocedure median. The clinical success at 3 years was 83%. The AVVQ and RAND-SF36 scores showed an improvement at all time intervals compared to baseline values. Between 12 and 36 months, however, a significant deterioration was observed in VCSS, which was accompanied by worsening of disease-specific and general quality of life. Conclusion: In the longest follow-up of MOCA to date, this study shows MOCA to be an effective treatment modality for GSV insufficiency at midterm follow-up, but clinical results seem to drop over time.
NesbittCBedenisRBhattacharyaVEndovenous ablation (radiofrequency and laser) and foam sclerotherapy versus open surgery for great saphenous vein varices. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014;7:CD005624.
2.
SiribumrungwongBNooritPWilasrusmeeCA systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials comparing endovenous ablation and surgical intervention in patients with varicose vein. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2012;44:214–223.
3.
DarwoodRJTheivacumarNDellagrammaticasDRandomized clinical trial comparing endovenous laser ablation with surgery for the treatment of primary great saphenous varicose veins. Br J Surg. 2008;95:294–301.
4.
RasmussenLHLawaerzMBjoernBRandomized clinical trial comparing endovenous laser ablation, radiofrequency ablation, foam sclerotherapy and surgical stripping for great saphenous veins. Br J Surg. 2011;98:1079–1087.
5.
ShepherdACGohelMSLimCSPain following 980 nm endovenous laser ablation and segmental radiofrequency ablation for varicose veins: a prospective observational study. Vasc Endovascular Surg. 2010;44:212–216.
6.
ShepherdACGohelMSBrownLCRandomized clinical trial of VNUS ClosureFAST radiofrequency ablation versus laser for varicose veins. Br J Surg. 2010;97: 801–818.
7.
RabeEOttoJSchliephakeDEfficacy and safety of great saphenous vein sclerotherapy using standardised polidocanol foam (ESAF): A randomised controlled multicentre clinical trial. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2008;35:238–245.
8.
LawsonJGauwSvan VlijmenCSapheon: the solution?Phlebology. 2013;28:2–9.
9.
MorrisonNGibsonKMcEnroeSRandomized trial comparing cyanoacrylate embolization and radiofrequency ablation for incompetent great saphenous veins (VeClose). J Vasc Surg. 2015;61:985–994.
10.
WhiteleyMSDos SantosSJFernandez-HartTJMedia damage following detergent sclerotherapy appears to be secondary to the induction of inflammation and apoptosis: an immunohistochemical study elucidating previous histological observations. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2016;51:421–428.
11.
Van EekerenRRBoersmaDEliasSEndovenous mechanochemical ablation of great saphenous vein incompetence using the ClariVein device: A safety study. J Endovasc Ther. 2011;18:328–334.
Van EekerenRRBoersmaDHolewijnSMechanochemical endovenous ablation for the treatment of great saphenous vein insufficiency. J Vasc Surg: Venous Lymphat Disord. 2014;2:282–288.
14.
EliasSRainesJK.Mechanochemical tumescentless endovenous ablation: final results of the initial clinical trial. Phlebology. 2012;27:67–72.
15.
BishawiMBernsteinRBoterMMechanochemical ablation in patients with chronic venous disease: a prospective multicenter report. Phlebology. 2013;29:397–400.
16.
WitteMEReijnenMMde VriesJPMechanochemical endovenous occlusion of varicose veins using the ClariVein device. Surg Technol Int. 2015;26:219–225.
17.
Van EekerenRRBoersmaDKonijnVPostoperative pain and early quality of life after radiofrequency ablation and mechanochemical endovenous ablation of incompetent great saphenous veins. J Vasc Surg. 2013;57:445–450.
18.
BootunRLaneTRDharmarajahBIntra-procedural pain score in a randomised controlled trial comparing mechanochemical ablation to radiofrequency ablation: the Multicentre Venefit versus ClariVein for varicose veins trial. Phlebology. 2016;31:61–65.
19.
VunSRashidSBlestNLower pain and faster treatment with mechanico-chemical endovenous ablation using ClariVein. Phlebology. 2015;30:688–692.
20.
KistnerRLEklofBMasudaEM.Diagnosis of chronic venous disease of the lower extremities: the ‘‘CEAP’’ classification. Mayo Clin Proc. 1996; 71:338–345.
21.
RutherfordRBPadbergFTComerotaAJVenous severity scoring: an adjunct to venous outcome assessment. J Vasc Surg. 2000;31:1307–1312.
22.
BowlingA.Measuring Health. A Review of Quality of Life Measurement Scales. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press; 1991.
23.
KlemTMSybrandyJEWittensCHReliability and validity of the Dutch translated Aberdeen Varicose Vein Questionnaire. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2009;37:232–238.
24.
BushRGBushPFlanaganJFactors associated with recurrence of varicose veins after thermal ablation: results of the recurrent veins after thermal ablation study. Sci World J. 2014;2014:505843.
25.
BrakeMLimCSShepherdACPathogenesis and etiology of recurrent varicose veins. J Vasc Surg. 2013;57:860–868.
26.
WeissRAWeissMAEimpunthSComparative outcomes of different endovenous thermal ablation systems on great and small saphenous vein insufficiency: long-term results. Lasers Surg Med. 2015;47:156–160.
27.
SpreaficoGKabnickLBerlandTLLaser saphenous ablations in more than 1,000 limbs with long-term duplex examination follow-up. Ann Vasc Surg. 2011;25:71–78.
28.
MerchantRFPichotO, Closure Study Group. Long-term outcomes of endovenous radiofrequency obliteration of saphenous reflux as a treatment for superficial venous insufficiency. J Vasc Surg. 2005;42:502–509.
29.
BiemansAAKockaertMAkkersdijkGPComparing endovenous laser ablation, foam sclerotherapy, and conventional surgery for great saphenous varicose veins. J Vasc Surg. 2013;58:727–734.
30.
HillDHamiltonRFungT.Assessment of techniques to reduce sclerosant foam migration during ultrasound-guided sclerotherapy of the great saphenous vein. J Vasc Surg. 2008;48:934–939.
