Skip to main content
. 2021 Jun 4;21(8):1–188.

Table 3:

Characteristics of Included Studies—Mechanochemical Ablation

Sample Size, N CVI Severity, CEAP C Class, n (%) Age, Mean (SD), Y
Author, Year Study Design, (Country) Vein(s) Treated, Mean Diameter, mm (± SD) MOCA Comparator MOCA Comparator MOCA Comparator
Compared With RFA and EVLA
Kim et al, 201978 Retrospective chart analysis (United States) GSV, SSV, ASV, Giacomini, perforator, multiple segments: NR 53a 25b (thermal treatments combined) C6 only C6 only 67.9 (11.6)c 57.2 (13.5)c
Vahaaho et al, 2019, 202080,85 RCT (Finland) Thigh GSV
MOCA 6.7 (1.6)
EVLA 6.5 (1.6)
RFA 6.4 (1.8)
59 EVLA 34
RFA 32
C2: 32 (54.3)
C3: 14 (23.7)
C4: 13 (22.0)
Missing: 0
EVLA
C2: 20 (58.8)
C3: 6 (17.6)
C4:7 (20.6)
Missing: 1 (2.9) RFA
C2: 18 (56.2)
C3: 7 (21.9)
C4:7 (21.9) Missing: 0
50.9 (12) EVLA 49.5 (11.9)
RFA 50.3 (13.9)
Vun et al, 201576 Prospective cohort (Australia) GSV, SSV Overall MD 9 (IQR 4–12) 55 RFA 50
EVLA 40
Overall C2–6 Overall MD 50 (IQR 31–82)
Compared With EVLA
Mohamed et al, 202083 RCT (United Kingdom) GSV, SSV, AASV
MOCA 6.5 (± 1.5)
EVLA 6.9 (± 2.1)
75 75 C2: 28
C3: 31
C4: 35
C5: 4
C6: 1
C2: 20
C3: 39
C4: 33
C5: 8
C6: 0
53 (14) 51 (14)
Compared With RFA
Holewijn et al, 201979 RCT (Netherlands) GSV
MOCA MD 6 (IQR 0.8–12)
RFA 6 (IQR 1.2–14)
105 104 C2: 5.9
C3: 59.8
C4a: 31.4
C4b: 2
C5: 2
C2: 4.2
C3: 66.7
C4a: 22.9
C4b: 3.1
C5: 3.1
MD 54.9 (IQR 16.3–81.2) MD 53.4 (IQR 22.8–77.9)
Moon et al, 201777 Prospective cohort (United Kingdom) GSV: NR 11 17 NRd NRd 46 (NR) 55 (NR)
Lane et al, 201774; Bootun et al, 201673 RCT (United Kingdom) GSV, SSV
MOCA MD 7
RFA MD 7
87 83 MD 4 MD 4 MD 54.5 MD 48
van Eekeren et al, 201375 Prospective comparative cohort (Netherlands) GSV
MOCA 5.7 (1.6)
RFA 6.8 (2.4)e
34 34 C1: 3
C2: 47
C3: 23.5
C4: 23.5
C5–6: 3
C1: 0
C2: 26
C3: 30
C4: 41
C5–6: 3
57.2 (15.2) 58 (17.8)

Abbreviations: AASV, anterior accessory saphenous vein; ASV, accessory saphenous vein; CEAP, Clinical-Etiologic-Anatomic-Pathophysiologic classification; CVI, chronic venous insufficiency; EVLA, endovenous laser ablation; GSV, great saphenous vein; IQR, interquartile range; MA, meta-analysis; MD, median; MOCA, mechanochemical ablation; NR, not reported; RCT, randomized controlled trial; RFA, radiofrequency ablation; SD, standard deviation; SSV, small saphenous vein; Y, years.

a

Results reported for 41 in the MOCA group.78

b

As reported by Table 1 in Kim et al, 2019.78 Article text reports that 11 people underwent EVLA and 18 RFA.

c

MOCA group significantly older (P = .0003).78

d

Study only reports mean VCSS score of 5.5 in MOCA group, 4.9 in RFA group (P = .6262).77

e

Vein diameter in RFA group was statistically significantly wider (P = .03).75