FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W3204071104> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W3204071104 endingPage "e359" @default.
• W3204071104 startingPage "e359" @default.
• W3204071104 abstract "Numerous devices are available for the treatment of venous insufficiency. Until recently, only one radiofrequency ablation (RFA) catheter (ClosureFast; Medtronic, Dublin, Ireland) has been widely available for clinical use in the United States. To date, no investigators have described their experience with a new RFA catheter, Venclose (Venclose Inc, San Jose, Calif), in clinical practice. We assessed the short-term success of great saphenous vein (GSV) ablation with the Venclose catheter compared with the ClosureFast catheter, according to the treatment times, number of RFA cycles, duplex ultrasound results, and morbidity. We performed a retrospective matched cohort study of patients who had undergone RFA for symptomatic GSV insufficiency at a vascular surgery practice (three surgeons) from 2019 to 2020. We included the first 48 consecutive patients treated with the Venclose catheter and matched them 1:1 with patients treated with ClosureFast catheter by age and sex. We excluded patients who had not had the GSV treated or had not undergone follow-up ultrasound within 1 week after treatment. We tested for significant differences in outcomes using the Fisher exact test if the outcome was rare (fewer than five events). Finally, we assessed for differences in treatment times and RFA cycles using multivariable linear and Poisson regression, respectively. We controlled for potential confounders established a priori (ie, vein length, surgeon, body mass index) and defined as α = 0.05. We included 96 patients. Descriptive statistics are presented in the Table. The treatment time and number of RFA cycles were significantly shorter and fewer (P < .01) for the patients treated with the Venclose catheter, after controlling for confounders. All GSVs were closed at the first ultrasound examination and none had recanalized at the second (∼1-6 months). No statistically significant differences were found in the incidence of complications, including thermal injury, nerve injury, superficial vein thrombosis, deep vein thrombosis, and pulmonary embolism. The providers achieved equal numbers of successful GSV ablation with both devices. The procedure times and number of treatment cycles were significantly less with the Venclose catheter, and adverse events were rare with both catheters. These findings have practical implications for patients and vascular surgeons, with enhanced procedure room efficiency and without increased morbidity.TableDescriptive statistics for retrospective matched cohort study of two radiofrequency ablation catheters used for great saphenous vein closure at a vascular surgery practice, 2019 to 2020VariableClosureFastVencloseP valueaTotal sample48 (50)48 (50)Age, years57.0 ± 16.456.9 ± 16.8.99BMI, kg/m231.5 ± 6.029.4 ± 6.1.10Sex1.00 Male20 (41.7)20 (41.7) Female28 (58.3)28 (58.3)Race/ethnicity.50 White39 (81.3)33 (68.8) Black1 (2.1)2 (4.2) Hispanic4 (8.3)9 (18.8) Other/did not disclose4 (8.3)4 (8.3)Length of vein, mm43.3 ± 16.948.7 ± 15.8.11Procedure duration, minutes3.2 ± 1.32.3 ± 0.7<.01RFA cycles, No.10 (7-13)7 (6-8)<.01GSV closureb48 (100.0)48 (100.0)NARecanalization of closed veinc0 (0.0)0 (0.0)NABMI, body mass index; GSV, great saphenous vein; NA, not applicable; RFA, radiofrequency ablation.Data presented as number (%), mean ± standard deviation, or median (interquartile range [25th percentile to 75th percentile]).Boldface P values represent statistical significance.aCrude analysis of group differences using the independent Student t test for continuous variables, the χ2 or Fisher exact for categorical variables, and the nonparametric K-sample test of equality for the median for count variables.bDefined as no reflux or the appearance of a closed vein at the first postprocedure duplex ultrasound.cAt second consecutive postprocedure duplex ultrasound. Open table in a new tab" @default.
• W3204071104 created "2021-10-11" @default.
• W3204071104 creator A5016735271 @default.
• W3204071104 creator A5021939087 @default.
• W3204071104 creator A5032061725 @default.
• W3204071104 creator A5045536389 @default.
• W3204071104 creator A5046261142 @default.
• W3204071104 creator A5072592037 @default.
• W3204071104 creator A5088429589 @default.
• W3204071104 date "2021-10-01" @default.
• W3204071104 modified "2023-10-18" @default.
• W3204071104 title "Practical Efficacy of a New Radiofrequency Ablation Catheter: A First Experience, Comparative Study" @default.
• W3204071104 doi "https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvs.2021.07.048" @default.
• W3204071104 hasPublicationYear "2021" @default.
• W3204071104 type Work @default.
• W3204071104 sameAs 3204071104 @default.
• W3204071104 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W3204071104 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W3204071104 hasAuthorship W3204071104A5016735271 @default.
• W3204071104 hasAuthorship W3204071104A5021939087 @default.
• W3204071104 hasAuthorship W3204071104A5032061725 @default.
• W3204071104 hasAuthorship W3204071104A5045536389 @default.
• W3204071104 hasAuthorship W3204071104A5046261142 @default.
• W3204071104 hasAuthorship W3204071104A5072592037 @default.
• W3204071104 hasAuthorship W3204071104A5088429589 @default.
• W3204071104 hasBestOaLocation W32040711041 @default.
• W3204071104 hasConcept C126322002 @default.
• W3204071104 hasConcept C141071460 @default.
• W3204071104 hasConcept C167135981 @default.
• W3204071104 hasConcept C2776131983 @default.
• W3204071104 hasConcept C2777202286 @default.
• W3204071104 hasConcept C2777377203 @default.
• W3204071104 hasConcept C2778902805 @default.
• W3204071104 hasConcept C2779480337 @default.
• W3204071104 hasConcept C2781267111 @default.
• W3204071104 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W3204071104 hasConcept C72563966 @default.
• W3204071104 hasConceptScore W3204071104C126322002 @default.
• W3204071104 hasConceptScore W3204071104C141071460 @default.
• W3204071104 hasConceptScore W3204071104C167135981 @default.
• W3204071104 hasConceptScore W3204071104C2776131983 @default.
• W3204071104 hasConceptScore W3204071104C2777202286 @default.
• W3204071104 hasConceptScore W3204071104C2777377203 @default.
• W3204071104 hasConceptScore W3204071104C2778902805 @default.
• W3204071104 hasConceptScore W3204071104C2779480337 @default.
• W3204071104 hasConceptScore W3204071104C2781267111 @default.
• W3204071104 hasConceptScore W3204071104C71924100 @default.
• W3204071104 hasConceptScore W3204071104C72563966 @default.
• W3204071104 hasIssue "4" @default.
• W3204071104 hasLocation W32040711041 @default.
• W3204071104 hasOpenAccess W3204071104 @default.
• W3204071104 hasPrimaryLocation W32040711041 @default.
• W3204071104 hasRelatedWork W1931162799 @default.
• W3204071104 hasRelatedWork W2003224283 @default.
• W3204071104 hasRelatedWork W2113384007 @default.
• W3204071104 hasRelatedWork W2121732710 @default.
• W3204071104 hasRelatedWork W2124183442 @default.
• W3204071104 hasRelatedWork W2156133006 @default.
• W3204071104 hasRelatedWork W2317073603 @default.
• W3204071104 hasRelatedWork W3085685983 @default.
• W3204071104 hasRelatedWork W3094237822 @default.
• W3204071104 hasRelatedWork W4289224121 @default.
• W3204071104 hasVolume "74" @default.
• W3204071104 isParatext "false" @default.
• W3204071104 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W3204071104 magId "3204071104" @default.
• W3204071104 workType "article" @default.