CASS (CyanoAcrylate closure versus Surgical Stripping for incompetent saphenous veins) study: a randomized controlled trial comparing clinical outcomes after cyanoacrylate closure and surgical stripping for the treatment of incompetent saphenous veins.

BACKGROUND: Several modalities are used for the treatment of varicose veins. Open surgical treatment with ligation and stripping of the saphenous vein has been the standard of care for many years. Endovenous thermal ablation has been shown to be a safe and effective alternative with high, long-term, target-vein closure rates. Despite this, there is the possibility of thermal injury to surrounding structures. The recently introduced cyanoacrylate closure is also considered to be a good alternative and the risk of injury to surrounding structures is minimal. The purpose of this study is to demonstrate the non-inferiority of cyanoacrylate closure with the VenaSeal™ closure system compared to surgical stripping in terms of clinical outcomes for the treatment of incompetent great saphenous veins. METHODS/DESIGN: This is an open-label, multicenter, prospective, randomized controlled trial evaluating the non-inferior clinical outcomes of cyanoacrylate closure compared to surgical stripping for the treatment of incompetent saphenous veins. After baseline measurements, participants will be randomly allocated into either the cyanoacrylate closure group or the surgical-stripping group. The primary endpoint of the study is the complete closure rate of the target vein in the cyanoacrylate closure group, and the absence of venous reflux or residual venous tissue after surgical stripping in the surgical-stripping group. These endpoints will be measured by Doppler ultrasound performed by qualified vascular technologists or investigators at 3 months after treatment. Secondary outcomes include perioperative pain, postoperative ecchymosis, clinical assessment (including general and disease-specific quality of life evaluations), complete closure rate, and absence of venous reflux or residual venous tissue at the 12- and 24-month follow-ups, as well as all adverse event rates during the 24-month follow-up period. DISCUSSION: This multicenter randomized controlled trial is designed to show non-inferiority in terms of complete closure rate of cyanoacrylate compared to surgical stripping for the treatment of incompetent saphenous veins. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Research Information Service (CRIS), ID: KCT0003203. Registered on 20 September 2018.

Rivaroxaban after Thrombolysis in Acute Iliofemoral Venous Thrombosis: A Randomized, Open-labeled, Multicenter Trial.

Recently non-Vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOAC) is replacing warfarin for the treatment of deep vein thrombosis (DVT). However, the role of NOAC after thrombolysis of acute iliofeomral DVT (IFDVT) is not yet defined. This randomized clinical trial aimed to compare the safety and efficacy of rivaroxaban versus warfarin after catheter directed thrombolysis of an IFDVT. Patients with acute DVT of both the iliac and the femoral vein (n = 72) were recruited and randomized to either standard anticoagulation (enoxaparin and warfarin, n = 35) or rivaroxaban (n = 37) after successful thrombolysis or mechanical thrombectomy. Primary efficacy outcome was a recurrence of any venous thromboembolism (VTE) within 6 months. Secondary safety outcomes included major bleeding, clinically relevant non-major bleeding (CRNMB), other adverse event, and all-cause mortality. Rate of recurrent VTE were similar in both groups (11.4% versus 12.5%; p = 0.94). Major bleeding or CRNMB was less in rivaroxaban group without significance (2.9% versus 9.4%, HR, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.03-2.96; p = 0.31). Recurrence-free survival and major bleeding-free survival at 6 months were not different in both groups. After thrombolysis of acute IFDVT, rivaroxaban was as safe and effective as warfarin in preventing DVT recurrence.