Reticular Vein Sclerotherapy Improved With Polidocanol Plus Hypertonic Glucose

Sclerotherapy for reticular veins in the lower limbs with 0.2% polidocanol plus 70% hypertonic glucose (HG) is superior to 75% HG alone for the disappearance of reticular veins, according to results from a  prospective, randomized, triple-blind, controlled, parallel-group study published in JAMA Dermatology.

Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to treatment with either 0.2% polidocanol diluted in 70% HG (group 1) or 75% HG alone (group 2). The study, which took place between March 2014 and December 2014, with 2 months’ follow-up, was conducted at a single academic medical center in São Paulo, Brazil.

The primary efficacy endpoint of the study was the disappearance of reticular veins within 60 days after the use of sclerotherapy. All reticular vein measurements were obtained from high-definition digital camera images secured before and after treatment. Safety outcomes, which were assessed immediately after treatment and then 7 days and 60 days posttreatment, included serious adverse events (deep vein thrombosis and systemic complications) and minor adverse events (pigmentation, edema, telangiectatic matting, and hematomas).

A total of 93 women were included in the final analysis. The median patient age was 43.0 years (range, 24.0-61.0 years) in group 1 vs 41.0 years (range, 27.0-62.0 years) in group 2. Sclerotherapy with 0.2% polidocanol plus 70% HG was significantly more effective than the use of 75% HG alone in the elimination of reticular veins from the treated area (95.17% vs 85.40; P <.001).

No serious adverse events were reported in either group. Of the minor adverse events observed, pigmentation was the most common, with a 3.53% treated vein pigmentation length in group 1 vs 7.09% in group 2, which was not significant (P =.09).

Reference

Bertanha M, Jaldin RG, Moura R, et al. Sclerotherapy for reticular veins in the lower limbs: A triple-blind randomized clinical trial [published online September 27, 2017]. JAMA Dermatol. doi: 10.1001/jamadermatol.2017.3426