Ignite Creation Date:
2025-12-24 @ 5:25 PM
Ignite Modification Date:
2025-12-29 @ 1:15 PM
Study NCT ID:
NCT01936168
Status:
COMPLETED
Last Update Posted:
2021-02-12
First Post:
2013-09-02
Is NOT Gene Therapy:
True
Has Adverse Events:
False
Brief Title:
MOCA Versus RFA in the Treatment of Primary Great Saphenous Varicose Veins
Sponsor:
Rijnstate Hospital
Organization:
Study Overview
Official Title:
Mechanochemical Endovenous Ablation (MOCA) Versus RADiofrequeNcy Ablation (RFA) in the Treatment of Primary Great Saphenous Varicose Veins: a Multicentre Randomized Trial
Status:
COMPLETED
Status Verified Date:
2021-02
Last Known Status:
None
Delayed Posting:
No
If Stopped, Why?:
Not Stopped
Has Expanded Access:
False
If Expanded Access, NCT#:
N/A
Has Expanded Access, NCT# Status:
N/A
Acronym:
MARADONA
Brief Summary:
The newly developed Mechanochemical Endovenous Ablation (MOCA) device uses a technique that combines mechanical endothelial damage using a rotating wire with the infusion of a liquid sclerosant. Heating of the vein and tumescent anesthesia are not required; only local anesthesia is utilized at the insertion site. Previously we showed that endovenous MOCA, using polidocanol, is feasible and safe in the treatment of great spahenous vein (GSV) incompetence. However, larger studies with a prolonged follow-up to prove the efficacy of this technique in terms of obliteration rates are lacking. This randomized trial was designed to compare occlusion rate, post-operative pain and complications between radiofrequency ablation (RFA: the current treatment for GSV incompetence) en MOCA.
Detailed Description:
None
Study Oversight
Has Oversight DMC:
False
Is a FDA Regulated Drug?:
None
Is a FDA Regulated Device?:
None
Is an Unapproved Device?:
None
Is a PPSD?:
None
Is a US Export?:
None
Is an FDA AA801 Violation?: