%0 Journal Article
%T Cyanoacrylate Embolization versus Endovenous Laser Ablation in Treating Saphenous Vein Insufficiency: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
%A Amshar M
%A Nugraha RA
%A Batubara EAD
%A Siddiq T
%A Indriani S
%A Adiarto S
%J Ann Vasc Surg
%V 0
%N 0
%D Nov 2021 12
%M 34780939
%F 1.607
%R 10.1016/j.avsg.2021.09.041
%X <B>BACKGROUND: </B>Cyanoacrylate embolization (CAE) is a novel non-thermal non-tumescent venous ablation technique that has shown promising results in treating saphenous vein insufficiency. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety profile of CAE in comparison to endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) in treating saphenous vein insufficiency.<BR><B>METHODS: </B>We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis in accordance with the PRISMA Statement. A systematic search was performed through online databases including PubMed, ScienceDirect, and Cochrane to find relevant studies. Manual searching was also performed from the references of the selected studies. Specific keywords that we used were "(cyanoacrylate) AND (laser OR laser ablation OR laser therapy) AND (vein OR venous OR saphenous vein OR venous insufficiency OR varicose vein)". Outcomes of interest were efficacy, safety, and intervention time. Efficacy was determined by venous closure rate one year post-intervention and Venous Clinical Severity Score (VCSS) one year post-intervention. Safety was determined by rates of periprocedural pain, skin pigmentation, nerve damage, phlebitis, deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and ecchymosis. Data extraction and quality assessment of included studies were performed by two reviewers, and statistical analysis was conducted using RevMan 5.4.0 software.<BR><B>RESULTS: </B>Five relevant articles (2 randomized-controlled trials and 3 cohort studies) were selected for this study, consisting a total of 1432 venous ablation procedures (710 CAE and 722 EVLA). From the efficacy point of view, venous closure rates and VCSS did not differ significantly between CAE group and EVLA group. From the safety point of view, pooled data showed that CAE group was associated with less periprocedural pain score (P < 0.001), lower skin pigmentation rates (0.60% vs 4.46%; P = 0.008), and lower nerve damage rates (0% vs 3.94%; P = 0.007). Rates of phlebitis, deep vein thrombosis, and ecchymosis did not differ significantly between the two groups. In addition, intervention time was significantly faster in CAE group compared to EVLA group (P < 0.001).<BR><B>CONCLUSIONS: </B>Cyanoacrylate embolization yields similar efficacy compared to EVLA. However, CAE is associated with less periprocedural pain, lower occurrence rates of skin pigmentation and nerve damage, and faster intervention time.