Crossotomy vs crossectomy for saphenous vein sparing surgery in patients with varicose veins due to ostial incontinence: protocol for double blind, multicenter, randomized trial
Accepted: 16 January 2024
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
Authors
Double‑blind/multicenter/randomized trial protocol. Eligibility criteria: age 18-70 yrs; C2-C5 leg varices secondary to the Great Saphenous Vein (GSV) incontinence; GSV size 6-10 mm, at 10 cm from the Saphenous-Femoral Junction (SFJ); ostial reflux lasting >0.5 sec at duplex ultrasound; negative reflux elimination test; acceptance of the GSV sparing treatment plus partial/total varicose veins removal. Exclusion criteria: non-isolated GSV reflux; district already treated; pregnancy/lactation; impaired walking ability; deep vein thrombosis/insufficiency; severe comorbidities. Participants recruited from 7 Italian tertiary referral centres. Interventions: crossotomy (no SFJ’s tributaries ligation) vs crossectomy. The study aimed to verify if GSV drainage through the SFJ’s tributaries reduces groin/peripheral recurrences. Primary endpoint: 1-year GSV reflux recurrence, positive to the Valsalva maneuver, originating from the SF. Participants equally randomized. Participants, care givers, and those assessing the outcomes blinded to group assignment.
How to Cite

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
PAGEPress has chosen to apply the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0) to all manuscripts to be published.