Skip to content

Great Saphenous Vein Sparing Segmental Radiofrequency Ablation in Varicose Veins Patients

Great Saphenous Vein Sparing Segmental Radiofrequency Ablation in Varicose Veins Patients

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT05372146
Enrollment
86
Registered
2022-05-12
Start date
2019-11-01
Completion date
2022-02-27
Last updated
2022-05-19

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Varicose Veins, Varicose Veins of Lower Limb

Keywords

varicose veins, chiva, hemodynamic correction

Brief summary

86 patients were randomized into hot-CHIVA (n=43) and control (n=43) groups. Study group patients had undergone radiofrequency ablation (RFA) VNUS Closure - FastTM of one segment of GSV close to saphenofemoral junction. Controls had undergone whole refluxing trunk ablation. Additional phlebectomy was performed in all the patients of both groups. Primary end-point was change in quality of life (QoL) measured with CIVIQ-20 at 12 months. Secondary end-points was recurrence of varicose veins at 12 months. The investigators also measured GSV caliber at the median and distal thigh change in hot-CHIVA group.

Detailed description

Aim - to compare GSV segmental radiofrequency ablation (hot-CHIVA) and conventional GSV ablation in varicose veins patients. This was a single-center, prospective, non-randomized, non-inferiority comparative study conducted on patients with primary varicose veins. In a study group (hot-CHIVA) GSV segmental ablation with concomitant phlebectomy was performed. Conventional GSV radiofrequency ablation was performed in a control group. Patients were enrolled from November, 2019 to February, 2021. All patients were examined clinically. Age, height, weight, body mass index, gender, side of disease, personal history of varicose veins were recorded. Medical history was taken. Disease description was made using advanced CEAP classification. Quality of life was measured by CIVIQ-20 and leg discomfort related to CVD symptoms on the operated leg was measured with a 10-cm visual analogue scale (VAS). Duplex ultrasound was performed in a standing position to access deep veins and GSV. We recorded reflux extention and presence of the re-entry perforators on the thigh or upper calf. Diameter of GSV near SFJ, at the middle, and lower part of the thigh was measured at inclusion in the both groups. Sample size The sample size was calculated considering the average values for the CIVIQ-20 quality of life questionnaire on 2nd year after the endovascular treatment and CHIVA treatment obtained by reviewing the literature. Selected parameters: first-order error (α) 5%; power 80%; boundaries of non-inferiority limit 2; the expected difference between the study groups of 0. Taking into account the possible dropout of patients from the study, the size of the groups is increased by 5%. The estimated sample size is 86 participants. Statistical analysis Data are presented using descriptive statistics. Normally distributed data are presented as mean with standard deviation. Not normally distributed data are presented as (Me) and interquartile range (Q1 - Q3). Two independent groups were compared with Student's t-test or Mann-Whitney test depending on data distribution. Friedman test was used to compare dependent variables. Pearson's chi-squared test or Fisher's exact test were used to compare nominal variables. A p-value of \<0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Interventions

PROCEDUREGSV radiofrequency ablation with concomitant phlebectomy

Radiofrequency ablation with concomitant phlebectomy

Sponsors

Pirogov Russian National Research Medical University
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
NON_RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
SINGLE (Subject)

Intervention model description

This was a single-center, prospective, non-randomized, non-inferiority comparative study conducted on patients with primary varicose veins

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* C2EpAsPrGSVa, C2,3EpAsPrGSVa * Reflux not lower than upper part of the calf, * Age more than 18 years, * SFJ diameter less than 15mm, * Incompetence of terminal-femoral valve, * GSV reflux more than 0,5 sec, * re-entry perforator on the thigh or upper part of the calf for patients in the hot-CHIVA group

Exclusion criteria

* C4-C6 class of CEAP * Pregnancy * Deep vein reflux more than 1 sec * SSV reflux more than 0,5 sec * Interventions for VVs prior to the inclusion * Those unwilling to sign an informed consent were also included.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Quality of life (QoL) was measured by ChronIc Venous Insufficiency Quality of Life (CIVIQ-20)12 monthsThere are 20 questions in the CIVIQ-20, each with 5 possible answers (1 to 5), the minimum possible score being 20 and the maximum 100. In order to calculate the GIS, the difference between the final score and the minimum possible score is to be divided by the difference between the theoretical maximum and minimum scores (100-20=80), multiplied by 100.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Varicose veins recurrence12 monthsVisual recurrence of varicose veins
Leg discomfort related to CVD symptoms measured with 10-cm visual analogue scale (VAS) at 3 months2nd day, 7th day, 1 months, 3 monthsUsing a ruler, the score is determined by measuring the distance (mm) on the 10-cm line between the no pain anchor and the patient's mark, providing a range of scores from 0-100. The following cut points on the pain VAS have been recommended: no pain (0-4 mm), mild pain(5-44 mm), moderate pain (45-74 mm), and severe pain (75-100 mm).
In a study group remained GSV trunk diameter at mid- and lower thigh was measured at 1, 3, 6, 12 months after procedure1 months, 3 months, 6 months, 12 monthsDiameter of GSV measured by ultrasound

Countries

Russia

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026