↓ Skip to main content

Mechanochemical ablation versus cyanoacrylate adhesive for the treatment of varicose veins: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Overview of attention for article published in Trials, August 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
54 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Mechanochemical ablation versus cyanoacrylate adhesive for the treatment of varicose veins: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial
Published in
Trials, August 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13063-018-2807-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Amjad Belramman, Roshan Bootun, Tjun Yip Tang, Tristan R. A. Lane, Alun H. Davies

Abstract

Thermal ablation techniques have become the first-line treatment of truncal veins in the management of chronic venous disease (CVD). Despite excellent outcomes, these methods are often associated with pain; generally due to their use of heat and the necessity of fluid infiltration around the vein. More recently, novel non-thermal techniques, such as mechanochemical ablation (MOCA) and cyanoacrylate adhesive (CAE) have been developed to overcome these unwelcome effects. So far, the novel techniques have been found to have similar efficacy to thermal methods, yet no direct comparisons between the non-thermal treatment techniques have been conducted to date, giving rise to this study. This is a prospective, multicentre, randomised clinical trial, recruiting patients with truncal saphenous incompetence. Patients will be randomised to undergo either MOCA or CAE truncal ablation, followed by treatment of any varicosities. All patients will be required to wear compression stockings for 4 days post intervention. The primary outcome measure is the pain score immediately following completion of truncal ablation, measured by a 100-mm Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). The secondary outcomes are entire treatment pain scores, clinical scores, quality of life scores, occlusion rates, time to return to usual activities/work at 2 weeks, 3, 6 and 12 months. Re-intervention rate will be considered from the third month. Cost-effectiveness will be assessed for each intervention at 12 months. The study is powered to detect a mean 10-mm difference in maximum pain score. Allowing for loss to follow-up, the total target recruitment is 180 patients. The study will be the first study to compare MOCA against CAE and is designed to determine which method causes less pain. Completion of this study is expected to be the end of 2019. ClinicalTrials.gov, ID: NCT03392753 . Registered on 17 November 2017.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 54 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 54 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 8 15%
Researcher 6 11%
Other 4 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 6%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 2 4%
Other 7 13%
Unknown 24 44%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 26%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 15%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Computer Science 1 2%
Other 3 6%
Unknown 26 48%