Registry to Investigate the Efficacy and Safety of VenaBlock VeIn SEaling System for VaRicose Veins in SingApore
NCT ID: NCT04339075
Last Updated: 2020-11-02
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
UNKNOWN
30 participants
OBSERVATIONAL
2019-10-01
2021-10-01
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
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.
COHORT
PROSPECTIVE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Venablock
Patients that have undergone Venablock treatment
Questionnaires
Questionnaires to access the quality of life (EQ5D, VCSS, CVVQ, CIVIQ, Patient satisfaction survey)
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Questionnaires
Questionnaires to access the quality of life (EQ5D, VCSS, CVVQ, CIVIQ, Patient satisfaction survey)
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
2. C2-C6 varicose veins/CVI (CEAP Class 1 patients will be excluded)
3. Symptomatic primary GSV,SSV or AASV incompetence, with reflux \> 0.5 seconds on colour Duplex, including one or more of the following symptoms: aching, throbbing, heaviness, fatigue, pruritus, night cramps, restlessness, generalized pain or discomfort, swelling
4. Patients who had GSV, SSV or AASV diameters of 3mm to 12mm in the standing position
Exclusion Criteria
2. Pregnant patients
3. Arterial disease (ABPI\<0.8)
4. Sepsis
5. Patient who are unwilling to participate
6. Inability or unwillingness to complete the time-point questionnaires
7. Adverse reaction to sclerosant or cyanoacrylate previously
8. Multiple drug allergies
9. Previous intervention with the VenaSeal cyanoacrylate glue closure system
10. Severely tortuous GSV, SSV or AASV
11. Life expectancy \< 1 year
12. Active treatment for malignancy other than non-melanoma skin cancer
13. Current, regular use of systemic anticoagulation (e.g., warfarin, heparin)
14. Daily use of narcotic analgesia or NSAIDS to control pain associated with venous disease
21 Years
90 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Singapore General Hospital
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Turn Yip Tang
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
Singapore General Hospital
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Singapre General Hospital
Singapore, , Singapore
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.
Yavuz T, Acar AN, Aydin H, Ekingen E. A retrospective study of a new n-butyl-2-cyanoacrylate glue ablation catheter incorporated with application guiding light for the treatment of venous insufficiency: Twelve-month results. Vascular. 2018 Oct;26(5):547-555. doi: 10.1177/1708538118770548. Epub 2018 Apr 11.
Ovali C, Sevin MB. Twelve-month efficacy and complications of cyanoacrylate embolization compared with radiofrequency ablation for incompetent great saphenous veins. J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord. 2019 Mar;7(2):210-216. doi: 10.1016/j.jvsv.2018.10.019. Epub 2019 Jan 14.
Rabe E, Otto J, Schliephake D, Pannier F. Efficacy and safety of great saphenous vein sclerotherapy using standardised polidocanol foam (ESAF): a randomised controlled multicentre clinical trial. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2008 Feb;35(2):238-45. doi: 10.1016/j.ejvs.2007.09.006. Epub 2007 Nov 7.
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.
Tang TY, Kam JW, Gaunt ME. ClariVein(R) - Early results from a large single-centre series of mechanochemical endovenous ablation for varicose veins. Phlebology. 2017 Feb;32(1):6-12. doi: 10.1177/0268355516630154. Epub 2016 Jul 9.
Vanlangenhove P, De Keukeleire K, Everaert K, Van Maele G, Defreyne L. Efficacy and safety of two different n-butyl-2-cyanoacrylates for the embolization of varicoceles: a prospective, randomized, blinded study. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2012 Jun;35(3):598-606. doi: 10.1007/s00270-011-0188-9. Epub 2011 Jun 3.
Brothers MF, Kaufmann JC, Fox AJ, Deveikis JP. n-Butyl 2-cyanoacrylate--substitute for IBCA in interventional neuroradiology: histopathologic and polymerization time studies. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 1989 Jul-Aug;10(4):777-86.
Nesbitt C, Bedenis R, Bhattacharya V, Stansby G. Endovenous ablation (radiofrequency and laser) and foam sclerotherapy versus open surgery for great saphenous vein varices. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014 Jul 30;(7):CD005624. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD005624.pub3.
Siribumrungwong B, Noorit P, Wilasrusmee C, Attia J, Thakkinstian A. A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials comparing endovenous ablation and surgical intervention in patients with varicose vein. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2012 Aug;44(2):214-23. doi: 10.1016/j.ejvs.2012.05.017. Epub 2012 Jun 15.
Darwood RJ, Theivacumar N, Dellagrammaticas D, Mavor AI, Gough MJ. Randomized clinical trial comparing endovenous laser ablation with surgery for the treatment of primary great saphenous varicose veins. Br J Surg. 2008 Mar;95(3):294-301. doi: 10.1002/bjs.6101.
Rasmussen LH, Lawaetz M, Bjoern L, Vennits B, Blemings A, Eklof B. Randomized clinical trial comparing endovenous laser ablation, radiofrequency ablation, foam sclerotherapy and surgical stripping for great saphenous varicose veins. Br J Surg. 2011 Aug;98(8):1079-87. doi: 10.1002/bjs.7555.
Marsden G, Perry M, Kelley K, Davies AH; Guideline Development Group. Diagnosis and management of varicose veins in the legs: summary of NICE guidance. BMJ. 2013 Jul 24;347:f4279. doi: 10.1136/bmj.f4279. No abstract available.
Shepherd AC, Gohel MS, Brown LC, Metcalfe MJ, Hamish M, Davies AH. Randomized clinical trial of VNUS ClosureFAST radiofrequency ablation versus laser for varicose veins. Br J Surg. 2010 Jun;97(6):810-8. doi: 10.1002/bjs.7091.
Shepherd AC, Gohel MS, Lim CS, Hamish M, Davies AH. Pain following 980-nm endovenous laser ablation and segmental radiofrequency ablation for varicose veins: a prospective observational study. Vasc Endovascular Surg. 2010 Apr;44(3):212-6. doi: 10.1177/1538574409359337. Epub 2010 Feb 11.
Lee Q, Gibson K, Chan SL, Rathnaweera HP, Chong TT, Tang TY. A comparison between Caucasian and Asian superficial venous anatomy and reflux patterns - Implications for potential precision endovenous ablation therapy. Phlebology. 2020 Feb;35(1):39-45. doi: 10.1177/0268355519845984. Epub 2019 Apr 29. No abstract available.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
2019/2749
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id