Compont - Varicose Veins of the Lower Extremities
Efficacy and Safety of Medical Adhesive in the Treatment of Varicose Veins of the Lower Extremities: A Prospective, Multicenter, Randomized Controlled Study
1 other identifier
interventional
188
1 country
1
Brief Summary
The purpose of this clinical trial is to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of Medical Adhesive produced by Beijing Compont Medical Devices Co., Ltd. in the treatment of varicose veins in the lower extremities. The main questions it aims to answer is: What medical problems do participants have when using tissue glue? Researchers will compare Medical Adhesive to ClosureFast Endovenous Radiofrequency Ablation (RFA) Catheter (produced by Medtronic Inc. to see if Medical Adhesive works to treat varicose veins in the lower extremities. Participants will: Treated with closed varicose veins of the lower extremity by Medical Adhesive or ClosureFast. Return to the hospital at 1, 12, and 24 weeks postoperatively for Doppler ultrasound, and at 4, 12, 24 weeks postoperatively for venous scoring.
Trial Health
Trial Health Score
Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach
participants targeted
Target at P75+ for not_applicable
Started Jan 2023
Typical duration for not_applicable
1 active site
Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.
Trial Relationships
Click on a node to explore related trials.
Study Timeline
Key milestones and dates
Study Start
First participant enrolled
January 11, 2023
CompletedPrimary Completion
Last participant's last visit for primary outcome
April 3, 2024
CompletedFirst Submitted
Initial submission to the registry
April 16, 2024
CompletedFirst Posted
Study publicly available on registry
April 29, 2024
CompletedStudy Completion
Last participant's last visit for all outcomes
December 1, 2024
CompletedSeptember 19, 2024
September 1, 2024
1.2 years
April 16, 2024
September 10, 2024
Conditions
Keywords
Outcome Measures
Primary Outcomes (1)
Clinical success rate
At 24 weeks after surgery, Doppler ultrasound was used to check the closure of the target blood vessels.
24 weeks after operation.
Secondary Outcomes (7)
Technical success rate
Immediately after operation
Target vascular closure rate at 12 weeks after operation.
12 weeks after operation.
Clinical signs
Screening period, 12 and 24 weeks after operation.
Venous Clinical Severity Score (VCSS)
Screening period, 4 weeks, 12 weeks and 24 weeks after operation.
Aberdeen Varicose Vein Questionnaire (AVVQ)
Screening period, 4 weeks, 12 weeks and 24 weeks after operation.
- +2 more secondary outcomes
Study Arms (2)
Medical Adhesive treatment group
EXPERIMENTALEndovenous Radiofrequency Ablation Catheter
ACTIVE COMPARATORInterventions
Medical Adhesive (produced by Beijing Compont Medical Devices Co., Ltd.) For varicose veins in the main saphenous vein, use 0.1 ml glue for every 3 cm of blood vessels.
ClosureFast Endovenous Radiofrequency Ablation (RFA) Catheter (produced by America Medtronic Inc.) The ClosureFast catheter precisely heats a 7 cm vein segment in one 20-second interval.
Eligibility Criteria
You may qualify if:
- Clinically diagnosed as great saphenous vein varices. (This operation only dealt with one side varicose veins of the lower extremities.)
- CEAP is graded C2-C6.
- Doppler ultrasound confirmed the patency of deep veins of lower limbs.
- Sign informed consent, voluntarily participate in the trial and follow up as required
You may not qualify if:
- A history of lower extremity deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism
- Recurrent varicose veins
- The diameter of target lesion of the great saphenous vein less than 2 mm or more than 15 mm
- The great saphenous vein is severely distorted or tuberculated at the root
- Sepsis or septicemia
- Allergic to n-butyl cyanoacrylate
- The distance between the skin and the target vessel wall of the great saphenous vein less than 5 mm
- Severe cardiopulmonary disease, shock, coma or multiple organ failure
- Lactating or pregnant women
- Participated in other clinical trials within 1 month before surgery
Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.
Sponsors & Collaborators
- Peking University People's Hospitallead
- Peking University First Hospitalcollaborator
- The Fourth Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University School of Medicinecollaborator
- First Affiliated Hospital Xi'an Jiaotong Universitycollaborator
- Liaocheng People's Hospitalcollaborator
- The Second Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical Universitycollaborator
Study Sites (1)
Peking University People's Hospital
Beijing, China
Related Publications (6)
Balint R, Farics A, Parti K, Vizsy L, Batorfi J, Menyhei G, Balint IB. Which endovenous ablation method does offer a better long-term technical success in the treatment of the incompetent great saphenous vein? Review. Vascular. 2016 Dec;24(6):649-657. doi: 10.1177/1708538116648035. Epub 2016 Apr 28.
PMID: 27126643BACKGROUNDMorrison N, Gibson K, McEnroe S, Goldman M, King T, Weiss R, Cher D, Jones A. Randomized trial comparing cyanoacrylate embolization and radiofrequency ablation for incompetent great saphenous veins (VeClose). J Vasc Surg. 2015 Apr;61(4):985-94. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2014.11.071. Epub 2015 Jan 31.
PMID: 25650040BACKGROUNDMorrison N, Gibson K, Vasquez M, Weiss R, Cher D, Madsen M, Jones A. VeClose trial 12-month outcomes of cyanoacrylate closure versus radiofrequency ablation for incompetent great saphenous veins. J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord. 2017 May;5(3):321-330. doi: 10.1016/j.jvsv.2016.12.005. Epub 2017 Mar 6.
PMID: 28411697BACKGROUNDDimech AP, Cassar K. Efficacy of Cyanoacrylate Glue Ablation of Primary Truncal Varicose Veins Compared to Existing Endovenous Techniques: A Systematic Review of the Literature. Surg J (N Y). 2020 Jun 19;6(2):e77-e86. doi: 10.1055/s-0040-1708866. eCollection 2020 Apr.
PMID: 32577526BACKGROUNDBeteli CB, Rossi FH, de Almeida BL, Izukawa NM, Onofre Rossi CB, Gabriel SA, Kambara AM, de Moraes Rego Sousa AG, Thorpe P. Prospective, double-blind, randomized controlled trial comparing electrocoagulation and radiofrequency in the treatment of patients with great saphenous vein insufficiency and lower limb varicose veins. J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord. 2018 Mar;6(2):212-219. doi: 10.1016/j.jvsv.2017.09.010. Epub 2017 Dec 9.
PMID: 29229466BACKGROUNDNordon IM, Hinchliffe RJ, Brar R, Moxey P, Black SA, Thompson MM, Loftus IM. A prospective double-blind randomized controlled trial of radiofrequency versus laser treatment of the great saphenous vein in patients with varicose veins. Ann Surg. 2011 Dec;254(6):876-81. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e318230af5a.
PMID: 21934487BACKGROUND
MeSH Terms
Interventions
Intervention Hierarchy (Ancestors)
Study Design
- Study Type
- interventional
- Phase
- not applicable
- Allocation
- RANDOMIZED
- Masking
- NONE
- Purpose
- TREATMENT
- Intervention Model
- PARALLEL
- Sponsor Type
- OTHER
- Responsible Party
- PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
- PI Title
- Chief physician of Vascular Surgery
Study Record Dates
First Submitted
April 16, 2024
First Posted
April 29, 2024
Study Start
January 11, 2023
Primary Completion
April 3, 2024
Study Completion
December 1, 2024
Last Updated
September 19, 2024
Record last verified: 2024-09
Data Sharing
- IPD Sharing
- Will not share