NCT06387264

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

55
Monitor

Trial Health Score

Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach

Trial has exceeded expected completion date
Enrollment
188

participants targeted

Target at P75+ for not_applicable

Timeline
Completed

Started Jan 2023

Typical duration for not_applicable

Geographic Reach
1 country

1 active site

Status
active not recruiting

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

Completed
1.2 years until next milestone

Primary Completion

Last participant's last visit for primary outcome

April 3, 2024

Completed
13 days until next milestone

First Submitted

Initial submission to the registry

April 16, 2024

Completed
13 days until next milestone

First Posted

Study publicly available on registry

April 29, 2024

Completed
7 months until next milestone

Study Completion

Last participant's last visit for all outcomes

December 1, 2024

Completed
Last Updated

September 19, 2024

Status Verified

September 1, 2024

Enrollment Period

1.2 years

First QC Date

April 16, 2024

Last Update Submit

September 10, 2024

Conditions

Keywords

Varicose Veins of Lower LimbNBCA

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

EXPERIMENTAL
Device: Medical Adhesive

Endovenous Radiofrequency Ablation Catheter

ACTIVE COMPARATOR
Device: ClosureFast Endovenous Radiofrequency Ablation(RFA) Catheter

Interventions

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.

Medical Adhesive treatment group

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.

Endovenous Radiofrequency Ablation Catheter

Eligibility Criteria

Age18 Years - 80 Years
Sexall
Healthy VolunteersNo
Age GroupsAdult (18-64), Older Adult (65+)

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

Study Sites (1)

Peking University People's Hospital

Beijing, China

Location

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: 27126643BACKGROUND
  • Morrison 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: 25650040BACKGROUND
  • Morrison 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: 28411697BACKGROUND
  • Dimech 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: 32577526BACKGROUND
  • Beteli 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: 29229466BACKGROUND
  • Nordon 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

Catheters

Intervention Hierarchy (Ancestors)

Equipment and Supplies

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

Locations