ESGVS: Sclerotherapy With Lauromacrogol

This study has been completed.
Sponsor:
Information provided by:
University Hospital, Grenoble
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier:
NCT00348764
First received: July 5, 2006
Last updated: NA
Last verified: July 2006
History: No changes posted

July 5, 2006
July 5, 2006
March 2004
Not Provided
Removal of truncular GSV incompetence evaluated at 6 months by echo doppler: no persistence of “sus gonal” saphenous reflux > 1 second.
Same as current
No Changes Posted
Removal of truncular GSV incompetence evaluated at 6 months by echo doppler: no persistence of “sus gonal” saphenous reflux > 1 second.
Same as current
Not Provided
Not Provided
 
ESGVS: Sclerotherapy With Lauromacrogol
Treatment of Greater Saphenous Vein (GSV) Insufficiency Using Echo-Guided Sclerotherapy With Lauromacrogol 400 Foam –Comparative Study of 3% Versus 1% Concentration.

To evaluate the efficacy and the tolerance of echoguided sclerotherapy using Lauromacrogol 400 foam for the treatment of Great Saphenous Vein (GSV) insufficiency. A comparative study of 3% versus 1% Lauromacrogol 400 foam.

A multicenter randomized double blind study to evaluate the efficacy and the tolerance of echoguided sclerotherapy using 3% versus 1% Lauromacrogol 400 foam in the treatment of Great Saphenous Vein (GSV) insufficiency.

One hundred fifty eligible patients will be recruited during 6 months from 9 study centers with a follow up period of 3 years and 7 visits at day 8, 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, 1,2 ,and 3 years.

After randomization, the patients will be treated by echoguided sclerotherapy with 1% or 3% Lauromacrogol 400 foam (ratio 1:1).

Monitoring is performed by doppler at 8 days, 6 weeks, 6 months , 1,2 ,and 3 years.

Effectiveness of sclerotherapy is determined at 6 weeks, 3 months and 6 months. A additional injection of 4 ml of foam can be performed if needed.

Severity clinical score and Quality-of-life questionnaire are performed at 6 months ,1 ,2, and 3 years.

The absence of obliteration with a reflux of crural great saphenous vein at 6 months will be a criterion of therapeutic failure.

The therapeutic success or failure criteria are evaluated by a non investigator angiologist for 5 patients randomized from each investigational site at 1, 2 and 3 years.

Interventional
Phase 3
Allocation: Randomized
Endpoint Classification: Efficacy Study
Intervention Model: Parallel Assignment
Masking: Double-Blind
Primary Purpose: Treatment
  • Venous Insufficiency
  • Saphenous Vein
Drug: lauromacrogol
Not Provided

*   Includes publications given by the data provider as well as publications identified by ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier (NCT Number) in Medline.
 
Completed
150
December 2006
Not Provided

Inclusion Criteria:

  • 25 - 75 years
  • Hawaii CEAP classification : C2-5 Ep, As2-3 Pr
  • Clinical Varicose veins C2, Edema C3, Skin changes C4, Healed ulcer C5
  • Etiology Ep Primary GSV insufficiency
  • As2-3: Ostial and or crural truncular GVS incompetence
  • Maximal inferior diameter of the leg GSV (patient in decubitus) between 4 and 8mm
  • Pr: reflux by echo doppler in orthostatism > 1 second
  • Information consent form signed by the investigator and the patient.

Exclusion Criteria:

  • deep venous reflux (CEAP: Ad)
  • Short saphenous vein or non saphenous network insufficiency (CEAP: A4-5)
  • Clinical class: C1 or C6
  • Recurrent GSV varicose veins after stripping
  • Thrombophilia or antecedent of deep vein thrombosis
  • Psychiatric disorders
  • Known allergy to Lauromacrogol or to one of its component
  • Arteriopathy. (IPS < 0.8)
  • Post-thrombotic disease
  • Chronic hepatoma
  • Renal insufficiency (creatinine > 150 micromol/l)
Both
25 Years to 75 Years
No
Contact information is only displayed when the study is recruiting subjects
France
 
NCT00348764
DCIC 03 38
Not Provided
Not Provided
University Hospital, Grenoble
Not Provided
Principal Investigator: DIAMAND Jean Marc Institut National de la Santé Et de la Recherche Médicale, France
University Hospital, Grenoble
July 2006

ICMJE     Data element required by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors and the World Health Organization ICTRP