Protocol for a pilot randomised controlled clinical trial to compare the effectiveness of a graduated three layer straight tubular bandaging system when compared to a standard short stretch compression bandaging system in the management of people with venous ulceration: 3VSS2008

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The incidence of venous ulceration is rising with the increasing age of the general population. Venous ulceration represents the most prevalent form of difficult to heal wounds and these problematic wounds require a significant amount of health care resources for treatment. Based on current knowledge multi-layer high compression system is described as the gold standard for treating venous ulcers. However, to date, despite our advances in venous ulcer therapy, no convincing low cost compression therapy studies have been conducted and there are no clear differences in the effectiveness of different types of high compression.</p> <p>Methods/Design</p> <p>The trial is designed as a pilot multicentre open label parallel group randomised trial. Male and female participants aged greater than 18 years with a venous ulcer confirmed by clinical assessment will be randomised to either the intervention compression bandage which consists of graduated lengths of 3 layers of elastic tubular compression bandage or to the short stretch inelastic compression bandage (control). The primary objective is to assess the percentage wound reduction from baseline compared to week 12 following randomisation. Randomisation will be allocated via a web based central independent randomisation service (nQuery v7) and stratified by study centre and wound size ≤ 10 cm²or >10 cm². Neither participants nor study staff will be blinded to treatment. Outcome assessments will be undertaken by an assessor who is blinded to the randomisation process.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>The aim of this study is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of two compression bandages; graduated three layer straight tubular bandaging (3L) when compared to standard short stretch (SS) compression bandaging in healing venous ulcers in patients with chronic venous ulceration. The trial investigates the differences in clinical outcomes of two currently accepted ways of treating people with venous ulcers. This study will help answer the question whether the 3L compression system or the SS compression system is associated with better outcomes.</p> <p>Trial Registration</p> <p>ACTRN12608000599370</p

Effectiveness of acupuncture, special dressings and simple, low-adherence dressings for healing venous leg ulcers in primary healthcare: study protocol for a cluster-randomized open-labeled trial

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Venous leg ulcers constitute a chronic recurring complaint that affects 1.0–1.3% of the adult population at some time in life, and which corresponds to approximately 75% of all chronic ulcers of the leg. Multilayer compression bandaging is, at present, the only treatment that has been proved to be effective in treating this type of ulcer. There is no consensus, however, about the dressings that may be applied, beneath the compression, to promote the healing of this type of ulcer, as there does not seem to be any added benefit from using special dressings rather than simple, low-adherence ones. As well as analgesia, acupuncture provokes peripheral vasodilation, in skin and muscles – which has been demonstrated both experimentally and in clinical practice – probably due to the axon reflex, among other mechanisms. The aim of the present study is to measure the effectiveness and cost of compression treatment for venous leg ulcers combined with special dressings, in comparison with low-adherence ones and acupuncture.</p> <p>Methods/design</p> <p>Cluster-randomized open-labeled trial, at 15 primary healthcare clinics in the Sevilla-Sur Healthcare District, with a control group treated with compression bandaging and low-adherence dressings; the experiment will consist, on the one hand, of the compression treatment applied in combination with special dressings (Treatment 1), and on the other, the compression treatment applied in association with low-adherence dressings, together with acupuncture (Treatment 2).</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>The results will be measured and recorded in terms of the median time elapsed until complete healing of the ulcer, and the rate of complete healing at 3 months after beginning the treatment. An economic analysis will also be made.</p> <p>This study, carried out in the context of real clinical practice, will provide information for decision-taking concerning the effectiveness of special dressings. Moreover, for the first time a high-quality study will evaluate the effectiveness of acupuncture in the process of healing venous leg ulcers.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN26438275.</p

Varisolve (R) polidocanol microfoam compared with surgery or sclerotherapy in the management of varicose veins in the presence of trunk vein incompetence: European randomized controlled trial

Objective: To compare the safety and efficacy of Varisolve (R) 1% polidocanol microfoam sclerosant with alternative treatments for patients with varicose veins and trunk vein incompetence. Methods: An open-label, multicentre, prospective trial of 710 patients randomized to receive either Varisolve (R) or alternative treatment (surgery or sclerotherapy). The endpoint was ultrasound-determined occlusion of trunk vein(s) and elimination of reflux, analysed against a non-inferiority hypothesis. Results: Overall, non-inferiority was demonstrated with 83.4% efficacy for Varisolve (R) compared with 88.1% for alternative treatment at three months, and the corresponding magnitudes were 78.9 and 80.4% at 12 months. Surgery was superior to Varisolve (R), but the success rate of 68.2% for Varisolve (R) (surgery 87.2%) was poor compared with 93.8% success for Varisolve (R) achieved in those randomized to Varisolve (R) or sclerotherapy. Varisolve (R) was superior to sclerotherapy at 12 months (P = 0.001). Deep vein thrombosis occurred in 11/437 (2.5%) after Varisolve (R), in 1/125 (0.8%) after sclerotherapy and in none after surgery. No pulmonary emboli were detected. Conclusion: Overall, Varisolve (R) was non-inferior to alternative treatment. Surgery was more efficacious, but Varisolve (R) caused less pain and patients returned to normal more quickly. The Varisolve (R) technique is a useful additional treatment for varicose veins and trunk vein incompetence