This study states that Venous leg ulcers (Clinical, Etiology, Anatomy, and Pathophysiology [CEAP] class 6) represent the severest form of chronic venous insufficiency. An advantage of VenaSeal (Medtronic, Minneapolis, Minn) adhesive closure of saphenous veins is nonthermal treatment of the entire length of the vein, which is especially important for venous wounds occurring on the distal leg. Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is limited in the ability to treat the entire length of the saphenous vein because of risk of thermal nerve injury, leaving untreated portions of venous insufficiency, including perforator veins. This study aimed to compare rates of additional perforator treatment needed between two techniques of superficial vein closure: RFA with ClosureFast (Medtronic) and adhesive closure (VenaSeal).
Patients undergoing RFA of refluxing perforators were evaluated and grouped according to the initial treatment modality of the saphenous vein (RFA vs VenaSeal). The primary end point was need for additional perforator procedure to heal a wound. A secondary end point included need for an additional sclerotherapy procedure to heal a wound. Bivariate analysis involved χ2 test, Fisher exact test, t-test, and Wilcoxon rank sum test. Multivariate linear regression analysis was used controlling for variables that were found significant in the bivariate analysis. Statistical significance was defined as P value < .05.
Reference link-https://www.jvascsurg.org/article/S0741-5214(20)31981-9/fulltext
