CClinicalTrials.gg
Active, not recruitingNCT02397226Updated Dec 6, 2024

Lower Limb Venous Insufficiency and the Effect of Radiofrequency Treatment Versus Open Surgery

An interventional study of Radiofrequency ablation and High ligation/stripping in Varicose Veins and Venous Insufficiency, sponsored by University Hospital, Linkoeping. Active, not recruiting at 2 sites in Sweden. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2024-12-06.

Sponsored by University Hospital, Linkoeping · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment

From the registry’s dates

  • Registered 6 months after the study started (first participant enrolled Sep 2014, registered Mar 2015).
Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
198
Allocation
Randomized
Sex
All
01

Study summary

200 patients with insufficient great saphenous veins will be randomized to either radiofrequency ablation or high ligation/stripping (open surgery). They will be examined according to standardized examination protocol Venous Clinical Severity Score (VCSS), with duplex ultrasound and plethysmography pre- and postoperatively (1-month, 1-, 3 and 5 years). They are to fill questionnaires EuroQol 5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) and disease specific Aberdeen Varicose Vein Questionnaire (AVVQ).

02

Conditions studied

  • Varicose Veins
  • Venous Insufficiency

Keywords

  • Radiofrequency ablation
  • Plethysmography
  • Duplex ultrasound
  • High ligation/stripping
03

In context

Venous Insufficiency

189 studies on the registry are indexed under Venous Insufficiency; 16 are open to participants now.

This study's enrollment of 198 is above the median of 60 across 139 interventional studies indexed under Venous Insufficiency.

Browse Venous Insufficiency studies →

Lead sponsor

University Hospital, Linkoeping is the lead sponsor of 118 studies on the registry; 16 are open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
Child (0–17), Adult (18–64), Older adult (65+)
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

  • Insufficient great saphenous vein
  • Possible to treat with both radiofrequency ablation and high ligation/stripping
  • Clinical Etiological Anatomical Pathophysiological score (CEAP) C2-C6

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Previous intervention in the affected leg
  • Insufficient accessory branch origin close to the great saphenous vein estuary in the femoral vein.
  • Small saphenous vein insufficiency with diameter >6 mm and/or flow >100ml/min
  • Patient that is not able to perform plethysmography
05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
None (open label)
Enrollment
198 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Active comparator
    Radiofrequency ablation

    Treatment with radiofrequency ablation using radiofrequency ablation catheter. This intervention implies tumescent anesthesia.

    Procedure: Radiofrequency ablation · Device: Radiofrequency ablation catheter · Procedure: Tumescent anesthesia

  • Active comparator
    High ligation/stripping

    Treatment with high ligation/stripping using a vein stripping catheter. This intervention implies general anesthesia.

    Procedure: High ligation/stripping · Procedure: General anesthesia · Device: Vein stripping catheter

Interventions

  • ProcedureRadiofrequency ablation
  • ProcedureHigh ligation/stripping

    Also known as: Open surgery

  • DeviceRadiofrequency ablation catheter

    Also known as: Covidien ClosureFast Catheter (7cm)

  • ProcedureTumescent anesthesia
  • ProcedureGeneral anesthesia
  • DeviceVein stripping catheter
06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Number of treated veins with recanalization using duplex.

    Flow detected by duplex at the site of the treated vein.

    Time frame: 5 years

  2. Number of treated limbs with neovascularization using duplex and/or plethysmography.

    Time frame: 5 years

  3. Prediction of treatment outcome using plethysmography with superficial shut-down.

    If plethysmography with superficial shut-down of the superficial venous system is able to predict the effect of treatment.

    Time frame: 1 month postoperatively

Secondary outcomes

  1. VCSS score

    The score of standardized examination protocol VCSS.

    Time frame: 5 years

  2. AVVQ score

    The score of disease specific questionnaire AVVQ

    Time frame: 5 years

  3. EQ-5D score

    The score of EQ-5D questionnaire

    Time frame: 5 years

07

Study locations

2 sites
  • University Hospital Linköping
    Linköping, Östergötland 58185, Sweden
  • Vrinnevisjukhuset
    Norrköping, Östergötland 60379, Sweden
08

References and documents

Publications

  • Nelzen POE, Skoog J, Oster M, Zachrisson H. Impact on venous haemodynamics after treatment of great saphenous vein incompetence using plethysmography and duplex ultrasound. Phlebology. 2020 Aug;35(7):495-504. doi: 10.1177/0268355519898952. Epub 2020 Jan 20. PubMed 31959059 ↗
09

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Dec 6, 2024, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT02397226
Lead sponsor
University Hospital, Linkoeping
Responsible party
Oskar Nelzén (MD, PhD, University Hospital, Linkoeping) — Principal investigator
First posted
Mar 24, 2015
Start date
Sep 1, 2014
Primary completion
Nov 25, 2021
Completion
Dec 31, 2026 (estimated)
Last update
Dec 6, 2024

Study contacts

Helene Zachrisson, Associate Professor, MD
study chair · Linkoeping University
Oskar Nelzén, MD
principal investigator · Linkoeping University

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is active, not recruiting, as verified in Dec 2024. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion