Authors
Agalarov R.M.1, 2, Mazajshvili K.V.1, 2, Markin S.M.1, 3, Kireev R.R.1, YUhnevich K.S.1
1 Surgut State University, Surgut
2 Vein Center «Antireflux», Surgut
3 Clinical Hospital RAS, Saint-Petersburg
Abstract
Non-thermal non-tumecent treatment of varicose veins are positioned as an alternative to endovenous laser obliteration. However, there is no complete understanding of the processes occurring in the wall of the vein at different times after its obliteration. There is also no data on a direct comparison of mechanochemical and cyanoacrylate venous obliteration. Purpose: to study the morphology of changes in the venous wall caused by mechanochemical and cyanoacrylate obliteration. Methods: mechanochemical obliteration with the Flebogrif system and cyanoacrylate obliteration with the Venaseal system were performed on the saphenous veins of 15 sheep. After 5 hours, 3 animals were removed from the experiment, veins were studied histologically and by differential scanning calorimetry. Results: 23 successful interventions were performed: 12 mechanochemical obliterations and 11 cyanoacrylate obliterations. In all cases, the general structure of the vein is preserved, mucoid swelling is observed and marked diffuse segmented infiltration of its wall, endothelium and muscle layer are partially damaged. Significant differences between the groups were not identified. Denaturation of the collagen of the venous wall with non-thermal non-tumescence methods varies in a wide range with a median of 72.5%. Statistical differences between the groups were also not revealed. Conclusions: non-thermal non-tumescence methods cause incomplete, uneven damage to the venous wall and marked leukocyte infiltration of the media in the early postoperative period.
Keywords: mechanochemical obliteration, Flebogrif, cyanoacrylate vein obliteration, Venaseal.
References
1. The Japanese Society for Vascular Surgery Database Management Committee Member, NVSDAT. Vascular surgery in Japan: 2012 Annual Report by the Japanese Society for Vascular Surgery. Ann Vasc Dis. 2019;12(2):260–279. doi: 10.3400/avd.ar.19-00030.
2. Malskat WS, Engels LK, Hollestein LM, et al. Commonly used endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) parameters do not influence efficacy: results of a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2019;58(2):230–242. doi: 10.1016/j.ejvs.2018.10.036.
3. Ignatieva NYu, Zakharkina OL, Mazayshvili CV, et al. Effect of optical fiber type and absorption medium on the endovenous laser ablation mechanism. Laser Phys Lett. 2017;14(10):105602. doi: 10.1088/1612-202X/aa86e5.
4. Massaki AB, Kiripolsky MG, Detwiler SP, Goldman MP. Endoluminal laser delivery mode and wavelength effects on varicose veins in an ex vivo model. Lasers Surg Med. 2013;45(2):123–129. doi: 10.1002/lsm.22069.
5. Yamamoto T, Sakata M. Morphological comparison of blood vessels that were heated with a radiofrequency device or a 1470-nm laser and a radial 2ring fiber. Ann Vasc Dis. 2016;9(4):272–276. doi: 10.3400/avd.oa.16-00120.
6. Jones AD, Boyle EM, Woltjer R, et al. Persistent type IV hypersensitivity after cyanoacrylate closure of the great saphenous vein. J Vasc Surg Cases Innov Tech. 2019;5(3):372–374. doi: 10.1016/j.jvscit.2019.05.004.
7. Hwang JH, Park SW, Kim KH, et al. Regression of varicose veins after cyanoacrylate closure of incompetent great saphenous veins without a localized concomitant procedure. J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord. 2019;7(3):375–381. doi: 10.1016/j.jvsv.2018.10.016.
8. Min RJ, Almeida JI, Mclean DJ, et al. Novel vein closure procedure using a proprietary cyanoacrylate adhesive: 30-day swine model results. Phlebol J Venous Dis. 2012;27(8):398–403. doi: 10.1258/phleb.2011.011084.
9. Boersma D, van Haelst ST, van Eekeren RR, et al. Macroscopic and histologic analysis of vessel wall reaction after mechanochemical endovenous ablation using the Clarivein OC device in an animal model. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2017;53(2):290–298. doi: 10.1016/j.ejvs.2016.11.024.
10. Barallobre-Barreiro J, Oklu R, Lynch M, et al. Extracellular matrix remodelling in response to venous hypertension: proteomics of human varicose veins. Cardiovasc Res. 2016;110(3):419–430. doi: 10.1093/cvr/cvw075.
11. Ignatieva NY, Zakharkina OL, Masayshvili CV, et al. The role of laser power and pullback velocity in the endovenous laser ablation efficacy: an experimental study. Lasers Med Sci. 2017;32(5):1105–1110. doi: 10.1007/s10103-017-2214-x.
