Clinical outcomes following mechanochemical ablation of superficial venous incompetence compared with endothermal ablation: meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND

Mechanochemical ablation (MOCA) is an alternative method to endovenous thermal ablation (EVTA) for the treatment of superficial venous incompetence that does not require tumescent anaesthesia. The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes from RCTs of MOCA versus EVTA.

METHODS

A search was conducted in MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL). Meta-analysis inclusion was restricted to RCTs comparing MOCA against EVTA. Outcomes included anatomical occlusion rate, disease-specific quality of life using the Aberdeen Varicose Vein Questionnaire, procedural and postprocedural pain, and rates of venous thromboembolism.

RESULTS

Four RCTs were included in the meta-analysis comprising 654 patients. The anatomical occlusion rate at 1 year was lower after MOCA than EVTA (risk ratio 0.85, 95 per cent c.i. 0.78 to 0.91; P < 0.001). No significant differences were detected in procedural pain (mean difference -3.25, -14.25 to 7.74; P = 0.560) or postprocedural pain (mean difference -0.63, -2.15 to 0.89; P = 0.420). There were no significant differences in Aberdeen Varicose Vein Questionnaire score at 1 year (mean difference 0.06, -0.50 to 0.62; P = 0.830) or in incidence of venous thromboembolism (risk ratio 0.72, 95 per cent c.i. 0.14 to 3.61; P = 0.690).

CONCLUSION

The rate of successful anatomical occlusion after MOCA is significantly lower than that after EVTA, but there is no difference in procedural and postprocedural pain between the two interventions. Long-term data are required to assess the impact of the reduced vein occlusion rate on clinical outcomes such as quality of life and reintervention.