Perforator Vein Injection for Symptomatic Venous Disease
NCT ID: NCT03363633
Last Updated: 2018-02-23
Study Results
Outcome measurements, participant flow, baseline characteristics, and adverse events have been published for this study.
View full resultsBasic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
TERMINATED
NA
12 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2010-03-31
2010-10-01
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
SeCure Endovenous Laser Treatment Study
NCT02215369
Percutaneous Electrocoagulation Versus Sclerosing Foam for Patients With Incompetent Perforating Veins
NCT04686097
Investigation of Femoropopliteal In Situ Valve Formation With the InterVene System
NCT03216005
Radiofrequency Ablation vs Laser Ablation of the Incompetent Greater Saphenous Vein
NCT02236338
Endovenous Laser Therapy (EVLT) for Sapheno-Popliteal Incompetence and Short Saphenous Vein (SSV) Reflux: A RCT
NCT00841178
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
The population targeted is patients with venous stasis or ulceration who either do not have demonstrable superficial reflux amenable to ablation, or have venous symptoms and ulceration despite treatment of incompetent superficial veins. When patients have refluxing perforating veins, there is debate on optimal treatment. Open and endoscopic ligation and compression therapy have all been tried with varying degrees of success and morbidity. The average rate of healing in venous ulcers is approximately .05 cm/wk 5,6, which has been shown to significantly improve after perforator ligation4, but with high morbidity. Ultrasound-guided injection of perforating veins is now performed, but with largely unknown benefits and consequences. The investigators propose a prospective, randomized trial of perforator injection with sodium tetradecyl sulfate (STS) foam vs. compression as a means of determining the efficacy and morbidity of perforator STS foam injection for symptomatic venous disease. The investigators currently utilize both methods of treatment in practice. Injections and compression or compression alone are chosen based on each patient's clinical scenario. STS is currently approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for intravenous use.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
PARALLEL
TREATMENT
SINGLE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Observation
No interventions assigned to this group
Injection + Compression
sodium tetradecyl sulfate
Ultrasound-guided injection with sodium tetradecyl sulfate foam of refluxing perforating veins
Compression
20-30 mmHg compression stockings
Compression
Compression
20-30 mmHg compression stockings
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
sodium tetradecyl sulfate
Ultrasound-guided injection with sodium tetradecyl sulfate foam of refluxing perforating veins
Compression
20-30 mmHg compression stockings
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* Subject must be willing and able to wear compression stockings
* Subject must have refluxing perforating veins ≥ 3.0 mm in diameter at the calf level or distally in the affected leg.
* Subject presents with ulceration or other symptoms of venous stasis including:
rash, swelling, pain, bleeding, recurrent cellulitis
• The subject must sign a written informed consent, prior to randomization, using a form that is approved by the local Institutional Review Board.
Exclusion Criteria
* Known allergy to STS
* Refusal to wear compression stocking
* Untreated significant great or small saphenous reflux
* Disseminated malignancy or other terminal condition where subject is expected to live less than 6 months.
* Significant arterial disease (ABI \< .8)
* Buergers disease
* Acute superficial thrombophlebitis
* Phlebitis migrans
* Acute cellulitis
* Clinical evidence of active local or systemic infection
18 Years
100 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
American College of Phlebology
OTHER
Ellen Dillavou
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Ellen Dillavou
Associate Professor
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Ellen D Dillavou, MD
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
University of Pittsburgh
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Shadyside Medical Building, Suite 307
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Cai PL, Hitchman LH, Mohamed AH, Smith GE, Chetter I, Carradice D. Endovenous ablation for venous leg ulcers. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2023 Jul 27;7(7):CD009494. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD009494.pub3.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
Protocol #4
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.