Breaking News: Unveiling the Latest Advances in Vascular Medicine
A Game-Changer for Venous Disease Treatment?
The VIVA Foundation, a leading non-profit organization, has just released groundbreaking clinical trial results at The VEINS 2025 conference, held at the iconic Wynn Las Vegas. These trials showcase innovative approaches to tackling complex venous conditions, offering hope and improved outcomes for patients.
But here's where it gets controversial... or at least, thought-provoking.
GORE® VIABAHN® FORTEGRA Venous Stent Trial: A New Era for Deep Venous Obstruction?
Presented by Dr. Stephen Black, this trial evaluated the safety and effectiveness of the GORE® VIABAHN® FORTEGRA Venous Stent in treating symptomatic deep venous disease. The results are promising, with a 12-month primary patency rate of 83.4%, and no reported stent migrations or fractures. This trial included a diverse range of patients, with 94.3% having lesions spanning three vessel regions. The stent's performance reinforces Gore's commitment to innovative solutions.
And this is the part most people miss...
The VIAFORT Trial is the first of its kind to include the inferior vena cava (IVC), iliac, and femoral veins, providing a comprehensive approach to treating venous obstruction. With such positive outcomes, could this stent become a game-changer in venous care?
Randomized Comparison of Cyanoacrylate Closure and Endothermal Ablation: A New Standard of Care?
Dr. Manj Gohel presents a randomized trial comparing cyanoacrylate closure (CAC) with endothermal ablation (ETA) for saphenous reflux. The study enrolled participants with varying degrees of venous disease and assessed quality of life, safety, and reintervention rates. The results indicate that CAC is a suitable alternative to the standard of care, with similar improvements in quality of life and a good safety profile.
But here's the twist...
Most CAC-related safety events occurred within the first 6 months post-intervention, suggesting a need for further long-term follow-up studies. This trial challenges the current standard of care and opens up a discussion on the best treatment options for patients with superficial venous insufficiency.
Novel Device for Chronic Venous Insufficiency: A Safe and Effective Option?
Dr. Steve Elias presents a study evaluating a novel percutaneous device for treating chronic venous insufficiency of the lower limb. The device, used in combination with ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy, demonstrated a 100% technical success rate and was well-tolerated by patients. Preliminary follow-up data showed impressive occlusion rates, with significant improvements in patient quality of life.
So, is this device a game-changer for chronic venous insufficiency?
Endovenous Ablation: Effective for Isolated Great Saphenous Vein Reflux?
Dr. Yana Etkin's study challenges the current reimbursement policies for endovenous ablation. The JURY-2 trial found that endovenous ablation provides equivalent short-term symptom relief for patients with isolated great saphenous vein reflux and those with combined saphenofemoral junction plus GSV reflux. This study suggests that treatment eligibility should be based on clinical need rather than junctional anatomy.
A Controversial Take:
Should insurers reconsider their policies based on these findings? Your thoughts are welcome in the comments!
Mechanical Thrombectomy vs. Catheter-Directed Thrombolysis: Which is More Cost-Effective?
Dr. Samuel Horr presents an economic analysis comparing large-bore mechanical thrombectomy (LBMT) and catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT) for intermediate-risk pulmonary embolism. The study found that LBMT is economically dominant, offering cost savings and improved patient outcomes. The analysis simulated a hypothetical cohort of 300,000 patients, demonstrating the potential impact of LBMT on healthcare costs and patient care.
But is it really that simple?
The study authors invite further discussion on the long-term cost-effectiveness and clinical benefits of LBMT.
Anticoagulation vs. Large-Bore Mechanical Thrombectomy: Real-World Outcomes
Dr. Jay Giri presents an observational study comparing the characteristics and short-term outcomes of pulmonary embolism patients who received either large-bore mechanical thrombectomy or anticoagulation alone. The study, utilizing a large real-world healthcare database, found that LBMT patients experienced improved short-term outcomes, including lower odds of in-hospital mortality and 30-day readmission.
A Thought-Provoking Question:
Could LBMT become the preferred treatment option for acute PE patients? Share your thoughts below!
Arteriovenous Graft Cohort of the WAVE Trial: 2-Year Clinical Outcomes
Dr. Mahmood Razavi presents the 2-year clinical outcomes from the WAVE trial's single-arm arteriovenous graft cohort. The trial evaluated the safety and efficacy of the Wrapsody Cell-Impermeable Endoprosthesis (CIE) in treating venous outflow obstructions. The results exceeded the performance goals, with a 6-month target lesion primary patency of 81.4% and a significantly higher proportion of patients without safety events.
A Much-Needed Solution:
With limited treatment options for dysfunctional AVG, the WAVE trial's findings offer hope and improved outcomes for vascular access specialists and their patients.
The VIVA Foundation: Leading the Way in Vascular Medicine
The VIVA Foundation strives to be the premier educator in vascular medicine, driven by a team of passionate specialists. Their educational events foster a spirit of collaboration, promoting awareness and innovative therapeutic options worldwide. To learn more about their work, visit https://viva-foundation.org/.
SOURCE: The VIVA Foundation
