Clinical Trials Logo

Clinical Trial Details — Status: Terminated

Administrative data

NCT number NCT00618514
Other study ID # 0407
Secondary ID
Status Terminated
Phase N/A
First received February 6, 2008
Last updated March 20, 2015
Start date June 2008
Est. completion date August 2009

Study information

Verified date June 2013
Source Vascular Solutions, Inc
Contact n/a
Is FDA regulated No
Health authority United States: Institutional Review Board
Study type Interventional

Clinical Trial Summary

This trial was designed as a prospective, multi-center, randomized clinical trial of the FDA-cleared Vari-Lase Bright Tip Fiber compared to commercially available standard bare-tip laser fiber (control) to demonstrate the safety and effectiveness of laser ablation for the treatment of varicose veins associated with reflux within the great saphenous vein (GSV) and to provide additional data concerning patient satisfaction. Within this evaluation, subject limbs were randomized to one of two (2) treatment groups utilizing a 1:1 randomization ratio. If a subject required treatment of only one limb, that limb was randomized to a treatment group. If a subject required treatment of two limbs, the first limb was randomly assigned treatment and the second limb was assigned the other treatment (the opposite treatment of the other limb). The data was analyzed by treated limb (versus treated subject).All study data were analyzed under the principles of intent-to-treat, in which data are analyzed according to the assigned randomized group regardless of the treatment actually delivered. Subjects were followed at one week, one month, and six months.


Description:

This trial was designed as a prospective, multi-center, randomized clinical trial of the FDA-cleared Vari-Lase Bright Tip Fiber compared to commercially available standard bare-tip laser fiber (control) to demonstrate the safety and effectiveness of laser ablation for the treatment of varicose veins associated with reflux within the great saphenous vein (GSV) and to provide additional data concerning patient satisfaction. Subjects were pre-screened utilizing standard of care data (including documented evidence of reflux within the GSV) for the specified inclusion/exclusion criteria to ensure that they were eligible for treatment in the investigation. Prior to laser treatment and after signing an informed consent form, study eligibility assessments were completed including physical assessment of target limb(s), duplex ultrasound of GSV segment(s) targeted for treatment, symptom assessment, medical history, and digital photos of targeted limbs. Upon enrollment, targeted limbs were randomized at a 1:1 ratio to receive the Vari-lase Bright Tip Fiber or the control treatment. If the subject required treatment of two limbs, the first limb was randomized and the second limb was assigned the other treatment (the opposite treatment of the other limb). Immediately post procedure, subjects were assessed for adverse events and a physical assessment of the treated limb(s) was performed. Subjects were also asked to complete a subject pain and satisfaction questionnaire. Subjects were followed at one week, one month, and six months. Follow-up included a physical assessment of treated limb(s), symptom assessment, adverse event assessment, and completion of a subject pain and satisfaction questionnaire. Additionally, a duplex ultrasound assessment was conducted at one week and six months and digital photos were taken of the treated vein segment(s) at one week and one month. The data was analyzed by treated limb (versus treated subject). All study data were analyzed under the principles of intent-to-treat, in which data are analyzed according to the assigned randomized group regardless of the treatment actually delivered.


Recruitment information / eligibility

Status Terminated
Enrollment 93
Est. completion date August 2009
Est. primary completion date August 2009
Accepts healthy volunteers No
Gender Both
Age group 18 Years and older
Eligibility Inclusion Criteria:

1. Subject is 18 years of age or older

2. Subjects with primary varicose veins resultant of GSV reflux documented on duplex ultrasound

3. Subjects that will be undergoing endovenous laser ablation treatment of varicose veins

4. Subjects treatment includes the Greater Saphenous Vein

5. If bilateral, subject is willing and able to undergo treatment of both legs within two weeks.

6. Subjects who are willing and able to comply with the requirements of the study protocol

7. Subjects who are willing and able to provide informed consent

Exclusion Criteria:

1. Subjects with severe peripheral vascular disease (PVD) as evidenced by an ankle-brachial index of < 0.5

2. Subjects who are unable to ambulate at baseline

3. Subjects with thrombosis in the vein segment(s) to be treated

4. Subjects that have had prior vein treatment

5. Subjects who are known or suspected to be pregnant or lactating

6. Subjects that are concurrently participating in an investigational study that may confound the treatment or outcomes of the present study

7. Subjects with an active or systemic infection

8. Anatomic variants- duplication of the GSV, presence of incompetent accessory veins of the GSV

9. Subjects who are scheduled to have a bilateral treatment, where one limb is to be enrolled in this study and the second limb that is not treated as part of this study, is treated within two months of the procedure for this study

Study Design

Allocation: Randomized, Endpoint Classification: Safety/Efficacy Study, Intervention Model: Parallel Assignment, Masking: Open Label


Related Conditions & MeSH terms


Intervention

Device:
Bright Tip Laser Fiber
Endovenous laser ablation treatment for varicose veins in a section of the Greater Saphenous Vein (GSV) using a laser fiber with a fitted ceramic tip on the end. Treatment performed on one leg.
Bare Tip Laser Fiber
Endovenous laser ablation treatment for varicose veins in a section of the Greater Saphenous Vein (GSV) using a laser fiber readily available on the market with a bare tip on the end. Treatment performed on one leg.

Locations

Country Name City State
United States Southeast Vein and Laser Dothan Alabama
United States HealthwoRx Hollywood Florida
United States Comprehensive Wound Care Kinston North Carolina
United States Mackay Center for Vein Treatment and Laser Therapy Palm Harbor Florida
United States Pottstown Memorial Hospital Pottstown Pennsylvania
United States Morrision Vein Institute Scottsdale Arizona
United States The Vein Center of Virginia Virginia Beach Virginia

Sponsors (1)

Lead Sponsor Collaborator
Vascular Solutions, Inc

Country where clinical trial is conducted

United States, 

Outcome

Type Measure Description Time frame Safety issue
Primary Number of Limbs With a Continued Absence of Flow Within the Treated Vein Segment Over 6 Months. The absence of flow was evaluated in each treated limb and determined by ultrasound (duplex or Doppler) interrogation. 6 Months No
Primary Number of Limbs With a Device-related Serious Adverse Event Reported Over 6 Months. Each treated limb was clinically evaluated for the presence of a device-related serious adverse event. 6 Months Yes
Secondary Percent Change of Subject Symptoms in Treated Limb From Baseline to 6 Months Using Venous Clinical Severity Score (VCSS). VCSS is a physician's evaluation of 10 pre-determined clinical signs or attributes of venous disease (pain, varicose veins, venous edema, skin pigmentation, inflammation, induration, number of active ulcers, active ulcer duration, active ulcer diameter and compression therapy). Each attribute receives a score from 0-3 (0=absent and 3=severe). The best total overall score is 0 (all ten attributes are absent) and the worse overall score is 30 (all ten attributes are severe). Each treated limb was evaluated and scored at baseline and at 6 months. 6 Months No
Secondary Percent Change of Subject Symptoms in Treated Limb From Baseline to 6 Months Using Venous Disability Score (VDS). VDS is a physician's evaluation of a patient's ability to work an eight-hour day with or without a support device (i.e., compressive therapy, limb elevation). The patient is scored on a scale of 0-3 (0=asymptomatic and 3=unable to carry out usual activities (patients activities before the onset of disability due to venous disease) even with compression and/or limb elevation). The score represents the degree of disability caused by the venous disease with the best score being 0 and the worse score being 3. Each treated limb was evaluated and scored at baseline and at 6 months. 6 Months No
Secondary Percent Change of Subject Symptoms in Treated Limb From Post-procedure to 6 Months Using Patient Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Pain Scores. Each subject completed a questionnaire to rate his/her pain. The scale is from 0-10 (0=no pain and 10=worst pain imaginable). Each treated limb was scored by the patient post-procedure and at 6 months to determine the improvement after treatment at the 6-month time point. 6 Months Yes
Secondary Percentage of Subjects Reporting an Excellent Satisfaction Score at 6 Months. Each subject completed a questionnaire to rate their satisfaction with the laser treatment. The score was reported as excellent, good, fair or poor. The best score of excellent was defined as "I am very satisfied with the laser treatment" and the worse score of poor was defined as "I am not satisfied with the laser treatment." Each treated limb was scored by the patient at 6 months to determine the percent satisfaction at the 6-month time point. 6 months No
Secondary Number of Limbs With a Device-related Non-serious Adverse Event Reported Over 6 Months. Each treated limb was clinically evaluated for the presence of a device-related non-serious adverse event. 6 Months Yes
See also
  Status Clinical Trial Phase
Completed NCT02441881 - Trial of Radiofrequency Thermo-ablation Treatments of Great Saphenous Varicose Veins (3-RF Study) N/A
Completed NCT03283800 - Copper Impact on Venous Insufficiency and Lipodermatosclerosis N/A
Recruiting NCT02676908 - Optimum Duration of Compression Stockings After Endovenous Varicose Vein Surgery N/A
Withdrawn NCT01203397 - Safety And Efficacy Study Of Topic Mucopolysaccharide Polysulfate In The Superficial Varicose Veins Treatment Phase 3
Withdrawn NCT01426035 - Safety And Efficacy Study Of Topic Mucopolysaccharide Polysulfate Cream In The Superficial Varicose Veins Treatment Phase 3
Recruiting NCT02054325 - Study Protocol Comparing Polidocanol Versus Hypertonic Glucose for Treatment of Reticular Veins Phase 4
Withdrawn NCT03601572 - Hypnoanalgesia in Surgical and Endovenous Treatment of Varicosis
Completed NCT04933591 - Impact of Treatment With VENARUS® on the Level of Monocyte Chemoattractant Protein 1 in Varicose Veins Blood N/A
Active, not recruiting NCT02397226 - Lower Limb Venous Insufficiency and the Effect of Radiofrequency Treatment Versus Open Surgery N/A
Withdrawn NCT02936271 - Efficacy of Vasculera in Prevention on Post-op Pain and Edema Following Lower Extremity Venous Treatment in the Outpatient Setting N/A
Terminated NCT02557542 - Pilot RCT Evaluating a One Stop Vein Clinic N/A
Completed NCT00758420 - Randomized, Single Blind, Placebo Controlled, to Evaluate Efficacy and Safety of Polidocanol Injectable Foam for Treatment of Symptomatic, Visible Varicose Veins With SFJ Incompetence Phase 2/Phase 3
Active, not recruiting NCT00841178 - Endovenous Laser Therapy (EVLT) for Sapheno-Popliteal Incompetence and Short Saphenous Vein (SSV) Reflux: A RCT N/A
Not yet recruiting NCT05508581 - Microwaves Ablation of Varicose Veins N/A
Completed NCT05247333 - Implementation of a Minor Ailment Service in Community Pharmacy Practice N/A
Active, not recruiting NCT04339075 - Registry to Investigate the Efficacy and Safety of VenaBlock VeIn SEaling System for VaRicose Veins in SingApore
Completed NCT03392753 - Mechanochemical Ablation Compared to Cyanoacrylate Adhesive N/A
Recruiting NCT04146168 - Lake Washington Vascular VenaSealâ„¢ Post-Market Evaluation
Recruiting NCT02304146 - Long-term Ultrasound Guided Foam Sclerotherapy Versus Classical Surgical Stripping Study N/A
Completed NCT01231373 - Polidocanol Endovenous Microfoam (PEM) Versus Vehicle for the Treatment of Saphenofemoral Junction (SFJ) Incompetence Phase 3