May 21, 2013

Comparing Treatment Options

 VNUS Closure Benefits

  • Minimally Invasive Outpatient Procedure. Closure catheters are inserted into the vein via a tiny incision in the lower leg, eliminating the need for groin surgery and general anesthesia. The Closure procedure can be performed using local anesthesia in a physician’s office, as well as in an outpatient hospital setting or surgicenter.
  • Clinically Proven Less Post-Operative Pain. The Closure procedure does not involve pulling the diseased vein from the thigh as with vein stripping surgery, or using 700° C laser energy which boils blood to occlude a vein as with endovenous laser (EVL)4. In the RECOVERY Trial, a multi-center head-to-head comparative randomized trial comparing the Closure procedure with EVL, the Closure procedure was found to have less patient pain and less patient bruising than EVL for the best patient recovery experience available from a minimally invasive vein treatment.2 Additionally, in other randomized comparative studies have shown that patients receiving the Closure procedure return to normal activity and work significantly faster than those receiving vein stripping.1
  • Excellent Clinical Outcomes. The ClosureFAST catheter, which represents the latest advancement in the Closure procedure, has been shown in a multi-center study to have a 97.4 efficacy rate at one-year.3 This shows that the treatment is highly effective and, as proven in the RECOVERY Trial, is gentle on the patient.2
  • Cosmetically Appealing. Because treatment with Closure is minimally invasive and is catheter-based, it results in little to no scarring. As with any medical procedure, you are encouraged to review all safety information associated with the procedure by consulting your physician.

1. Lurie, F, et al.Prospective randomized study of endovenous radiofrequency obliteration (Closure procedure) versus ligation and stripping in a selected patient population (EVOLVeS Study), J Vasc Surg 2003; 38(2):207-14.

2. RECOVERY Trial – Data on File – VNUS Medical Technologies, Inc.

3. Dietzek A, Two-Year Follow-Up Data From A Prospective, Multicenter Study Of The Efficacy Of The ClosureFAST Catheter, 35th Annual Veith Symposium. November 19, 2008.New York.

4.  Weiss RA, et al. Comparison of Endovenous Radiofrequency Versus 10nm Diode Laser Occlusion of Large Veins in an Animal Model. Dermotol Surgery 2002; 28: 56-61