Two-year follow-up of a n-butyl-2-cyanoacrylate glue ablation for the treatment of saphenous vein insufficiency with a novel application catheter with guiding light.

Abstract

Objectives This study aims to present the early results of a prospective study of the use of novel n-butyl-2 cyanoacrylate (VenaBlock)-based nontumescent endovenous ablation with a guiding light for the treatment of patients with varicose veins. Methods Five hundred and seventy-three patients with lower-limb venous insufficiency were treated within in the previous four years. The study enrolled adults aged 21–70 years with symptomatic moderate to severe varicosities (C2–C6 patients clinical, etiological, anatomical, and pathophysiological classification) and great saphenous vein reflux lasting longer than 0.5 s with great saphenous vein diameter ≥ 5.5 mm assessed in the standing position. Duplex ultrasound imaging and clinical follow-up were performed on the third day, first month, and sixth month. Clinical, etiological, anatomical, pathophysiological classification; venous clinical severity score; and completed Aberdeen varicose vein questionnaire were recorded. Results Five hundred and seventy-three patients aged 21–70 years with lower-extremity venous insufficiency treated with n-butyl-2. The mean treatment length was 30.6 ± 5.3 cm and the average n-butyl-2 delivered was 1.2 ± 0.3 ml. The mean procedure time was 10.8 ± 4.7 min. There was no deep venous thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, or paresthesia. We observed ecchymosis in eight patients (1.4%) at the entry site at the third day follow-up. Phlebitis was encountered with 10 (1.8%) patients. No skin pigmentation, hematoma, paresthesia, deep-vein thrombosis, or pulmonary embolism was observed. Procedural success was 100%, and complete occlusion was observed after treatment, at the third day follow-up and at first month. Kaplan–Meier analysis yielded with overall clinical recurrence-free rate after a mean follow-up of 23.96 months was 99.38%. All patients had significant improvement in venous clinical severity score and quality-of-life scores postoperatively ( p < 0.0001). Venous clinical severity score scores at preintervention and 24th month were 5.8 ± 1.0 (range 4–8) and 0.6 ± 0.6 (range 0–4), respectively ( p < 0.0001). Aberdeen varicose vein questionnaire scores at preintervention and 24th month were 19.7 ± 6.4 (range 9–30) and 4.4 ± 1.1 (range 1–9), respectively ( p < 0.0001). Conclusions The procedure appears to be feasible, safe, and efficient in treating the great majority of incompetent great saphenous veins with this technique.