John Blebea, Eri Fukaya, Keith S Moore, Fedor Lurie
{"title":"针对静脉功能不全的曲张静脉机械化学辅助消融术:美国静脉与淋巴协会立场声明。","authors":"John Blebea, Eri Fukaya, Keith S Moore, Fedor Lurie","doi":"10.1177/02683555241276554","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background:</b> Mechanical occlusion chemically assisted ablation (MOCA) of incompetent saphenous veins has been utilized since its FDA approval in 2008. However, only recently have longer-term three and 5 year clinical follow up data become available. This updated information necessitates a societal update to guide treatment and ensure optimal patient outcomes. <b>Method:</b> The American Vein and Lymphatic Society convened an expert panel to write a Position Statement with explanations and recommendations for the appropriate use of MOCA for patients with venous insufficiency. <b>Result:</b> This Position Statement was produced by the expert panel with recommendations for appropriate use, treatment technique, outcomes review, and potential adverse events. These recommendations were reviewed, edited, and approved by the Guidelines Committee of the Society. <b>Conclusions:</b> MOCA is effective in alleviating symptoms and a safe treatment option for venous insufficiency. It obviates the need for tumescent anesthesia, has less procedural discomfort and lower risk of thermal nerve or skin injury. It may be used in both the below knee distal GSV as well as the SSV. However, it is associated with significantly lower rates of vessel closure and higher recanalization rates compared to both RFA and EVLA and is less cost effective than thermal techniques. It is an available option for those in whom thermal ablation is not suitable.</p>","PeriodicalId":94350,"journal":{"name":"Phlebology","volume":" ","pages":"2683555241276554"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Mechanochemical chemically assisted ablation of varicose veins for venous insufficiency: American vein and lymphatic society position statement.\",\"authors\":\"John Blebea, Eri Fukaya, Keith S Moore, Fedor Lurie\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/02683555241276554\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Background:</b> Mechanical occlusion chemically assisted ablation (MOCA) of incompetent saphenous veins has been utilized since its FDA approval in 2008. However, only recently have longer-term three and 5 year clinical follow up data become available. This updated information necessitates a societal update to guide treatment and ensure optimal patient outcomes. <b>Method:</b> The American Vein and Lymphatic Society convened an expert panel to write a Position Statement with explanations and recommendations for the appropriate use of MOCA for patients with venous insufficiency. <b>Result:</b> This Position Statement was produced by the expert panel with recommendations for appropriate use, treatment technique, outcomes review, and potential adverse events. These recommendations were reviewed, edited, and approved by the Guidelines Committee of the Society. <b>Conclusions:</b> MOCA is effective in alleviating symptoms and a safe treatment option for venous insufficiency. It obviates the need for tumescent anesthesia, has less procedural discomfort and lower risk of thermal nerve or skin injury. It may be used in both the below knee distal GSV as well as the SSV. However, it is associated with significantly lower rates of vessel closure and higher recanalization rates compared to both RFA and EVLA and is less cost effective than thermal techniques. It is an available option for those in whom thermal ablation is not suitable.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":94350,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Phlebology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"2683555241276554\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Phlebology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/02683555241276554\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Phlebology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/02683555241276554","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Mechanochemical chemically assisted ablation of varicose veins for venous insufficiency: American vein and lymphatic society position statement.
Background: Mechanical occlusion chemically assisted ablation (MOCA) of incompetent saphenous veins has been utilized since its FDA approval in 2008. However, only recently have longer-term three and 5 year clinical follow up data become available. This updated information necessitates a societal update to guide treatment and ensure optimal patient outcomes. Method: The American Vein and Lymphatic Society convened an expert panel to write a Position Statement with explanations and recommendations for the appropriate use of MOCA for patients with venous insufficiency. Result: This Position Statement was produced by the expert panel with recommendations for appropriate use, treatment technique, outcomes review, and potential adverse events. These recommendations were reviewed, edited, and approved by the Guidelines Committee of the Society. Conclusions: MOCA is effective in alleviating symptoms and a safe treatment option for venous insufficiency. It obviates the need for tumescent anesthesia, has less procedural discomfort and lower risk of thermal nerve or skin injury. It may be used in both the below knee distal GSV as well as the SSV. However, it is associated with significantly lower rates of vessel closure and higher recanalization rates compared to both RFA and EVLA and is less cost effective than thermal techniques. It is an available option for those in whom thermal ablation is not suitable.