• Title/Summary/Keyword: 스트리핑 방법

Search Result 11, Processing Time 0.014 seconds

Clinical Experience of $VNUS^{(R)}Closure$ fast in Treatment of Varicose Vein: Comparison with Traditional Radiofrequency Ablation (하지정맥류 치료를 위한 2세대 고주파 열폐쇄술($VNUS^{(R)}Colosure$ fast)과 기존의 고주파 열폐쇄술($VNUS^{(R)}Closure$ plus)의 임상치험 비교 분석)

  • Kim, Woo-Shik;Lee, Jeong-Sang;Jeong, Seong-Cheol;Shin, Vong-Chul
    • Journal of Chest Surgery
    • /
    • v.43 no.6
    • /
    • pp.635-641
    • /
    • 2010
  • Background: Radiofrequency endovenous ablation of incompetent saphenous vein has gaining popularity over the conventional ligation and stripping as a minimally invasive technique. The latest version of radiofrequency endovenous catheter, $VNUS^{\circledR}Colosure$ fast VNUS medical Technologies, San Jose, CA, adopted a segmental ablation system, instead of continous pullback, is designed to reduce treatment time in comparison with the previous model $VNUS^{\circledR}Colosure$ plus VNUS medical Technologies, San Jose, CA. The purpose of this study is to compare the difference between two endovenous radiofrequency ablation systems in terms of treatment efficacy and complication rates. We analyze the initial efficacy and complication rates of $VNUS^{\circledR}Colosure$ fast with $VNUS^{\circledR}Colosure$ plus. Material and Method: Between June 2006 and August 2009, $VNUS^{\circledR}Colosure$ plus was performed to treat varicose vein on 59 limbs in 41. patients and $VNUS^{\circledR}Colosure$ fast was performed on 76 limbs in 67 patients. We retrospectively compared in both group with sex, mean treatment time, mean treatment diameter, conjugated treatment, and complications after the procedure. Result: All patient were symptomatic and diagnosed as varicose vein and underwent level 2 clinical classification with color duplex scan. The mean treatment time for the great saphenous vein was significantly less with $VNUS^{\circledR}Colosure$ fast ($17.0{\pm}6.5min$) than $VNUS^{\circledR}Colosure$ plus ($62.7{\pm}9.8min$). There was no significant difference in 1 yr closure rate between groups (p=0.32). Minor complications such as skin burn, thrombophlebitis, ecchymosis, hematoma, cellulitis, tenderness, and there were not different between the groups. Conclusion: Both $VNUS^{\circledR}Colosure$ fast and $VNUS^{\circledR}Colosure$ plus are effective methods of endovenous saphenous ablation. $VNUS^{\circledR}Colosure$ fast is superior to the previous model with less treatment time preserving compatible efficacy and complications. The efficacy of $VNUS^{\circledR}Colosure$ fast for long term closure rate remains to be established.