Comparative analysis of VenaBlock and VenaSeal Systems for catheter-guided endovenous cyanoacrylate closure in treating chronic venous insufficiency of the lower extremity: effectiveness and feasibility.

Abstract

Cyanoacrylate adhesive closure (CAC) systems are widely used to treat varicose veins. In terms of efficacy and safety, these nonthermal, non-tumescent methods are noninferior to endovenous thermal ablation techniques. However, no published studies have compared products that use CAC systems. VenaSeal^® (Medtronic, Santa Rosa, CA, USA) and VenaBlock^® (Invamed) are the most commonly used CAC-based products worldwide. This study aimed to focus on the efficacy of these two commonly used products, with little emphasis on safety. Published full-text articles on the VenaBlock^® and VenaSeal^® systems were searched. Data for each product were evaluated by comparing them with each other in terms of effectiveness. In total, 1882 extremities from 11 studies using VenaBlock^® and 524 extremities from eight studies using VenaSeal^® were included and compared. Both devices were effective, and their cumulative recanalization-free survival rates were similar (P=0.188) at the 6-, 12-, 24-, 36-, and 60-month follow-ups. Both products improved the venous clinical severity score (VCSS) and quality of life (QoL) scores. VenaBlock^® and VenaSeal^® are effective in terms of cumulative recanalization-free survival rates, and no significant difference was found between the two groups (P=0.188). Both significantly improve the VCSS and QoL scores. CAC is feasible for the treatment of varicose veins.