Comparative analysis of VenaBlock and VenaSeal Systems for catheter-guided endovenous cyanoacrylate closure in treating chronic venous insufficiency of the lower extremity: effectiveness and feasibility

Cyanoacrylate adhesive closure (CAC) systems are widely used to treat varicose veins. In terms of efficacy and safety, these nonthermal, non-tumescent methods are noninferior to endovenous thermal ablation techniques. However, no published studies have compared products that use CAC systems. VenaSeal (R) (R) (Medtronic, Santa Rosa, CA, USA) and VenaBlock (R) (Invamed) are the most commonly used CAC-based products worldwide. This study aimed to focus on the efficacy of these two commonly used products, with little emphasis on safety. Published full-text articles on the VenaBlock (R) (R) and VenaSeal (R) (R) systems were searched. Data for each product were evaluated by comparing them with each other in terms of effectiveness. In total, 1882 extremities from 11 studies using VenaBlock (R) (R) and 524 extremities from eight studies using VenaSeal (R) (R) were included and compared. Both devices were effective, and their cumulative recanalization-free survival rates were similar (P=0.188) at the 6-, 12-, 24-, 36-, and 60-month follow-ups. Both products improved the venous clinical severity score (VCSS) and quality of life (QoL) scores. VenaBlock (R) (R) and VenaSeal (R) (R) are effective in terms of cumulative recanalization-free survival rates, and no significant difference was found between the two groups (P=0.188). Both significantly improve the VCSS and QoL scores. CAC is feasible for the treatment of varicose veins.