Affiliation:
1. Centre for Medical and Corporate Training;
“SM-Clinic” Phlebology Center
Abstract
Over the last decade non-thermal non-tumescent (NTNT) methods of truncal reflux elimination in chronic venous disease (CVD) are becoming increasingly popular. The main NTNT modalities are mechanochemical ablation and cyanoacrylate adhesive closure (CAC). The advantages of non-thermal ablation are avoidance of tumescent anesthesia, low periprocedural pain and bruising, high patient comfort and satisfaction rates. CAC method has an additional benefit of avoiding the postprocedural compression. CAC is one of promising non-thermal ablation procedures, that leads to truncal vein occlusion and reflux elimination via endovenous delivery of n-butyl-2-cyanoacrylate. This review is aimed at assessment of the updated European and American clinical practice guidelines on CVD management, particularly the role of CAC. Current evidence shows high efficacy and safety of the CAC, its advantages regarding the periprocedural pain and ecchymoses, risk of adverse events, closure rates in the long-term, procedure and recovery time and patients’ quality of life. Therefore, along the current gold standard of varicose vein treatment – thermal ablation, the updated 2022 European and American clinical practice guidelines have significantly emphasized the role of NTNT modalities in general and CAC in particular. Specifically, the European Society for Vascular Surgeons guidelines recommend CAC for patients with great saphenous vein (GSV) incompetence when the NTNT technique is preferred. American guidelines recommend both thermal and non-thermal ablation for the patients with symptomatic axial reflux of the GSV, depending on the available expertise of the treating physician and the preference of the patient.
Subject
Urology,Surgery,Gastroenterology,Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine,Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine
Reference29 articles.
1. Bootun R., Lane T.R., Davies A.H. The advent of non-thermal, non-tumescent techniques for treatment of varicose veins. Phlebology. 2016;31(1):5–14. https://doi.org/10.1177/0268355515593186.
2. Whiteley M.S. Glue, steam and Clarivein-Best practice techniques and evidence. Phlebology. 2015;30(2 Suppl.):24–28. https://doi.org/10.1177/0268355515591447.
3. Whiteley M.S. Current Best Practice in the Management of Varicose Veins. Clin Cosmet Investig Dermatol. 2022;15:567–583. https://doi.org/10.2147/CCID.S294990.
4. van Eekeren R.R., Boersma D., Elias S., Holewijn S., Werson D.A., de Vries J.P., Reijnen M.M. Endovenous mechanochemical ablation of great saphenous vein incompetence using the ClariVein device: a safety study. J Endovasc Ther. 2011;18(3):328–334. https://doi.org/10.1583/11-3394.1.
5. Witte M.E., Reijnen M.M., de Vries J.P., Zeebregts C.J. Mechanochemical Endovenous Occlusion of Varicose Veins Using the ClariVein® Device. Surg Technol Int. 2015;26:219–225. Available at: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26055013.