VenaBlock®
Device & Technology
A non-thermal, non-tumescent endovenous closure system that seals incompetent saphenous veins with medical-grade n-butyl-2-cyanoacrylate under duplex ultrasound guidance.
¹ Eroglu et al., Vascular 2018 · ² Linn, Yap et al., Phlebology 2021. Study results; individual outcomes may vary.
Mechanism of action
VenaBlock® delivers n-butyl-2-cyanoacrylate (NBCA) into the lumen of the incompetent vein. On contact with blood — a weak base — the monomer undergoes rapid anionic polymerisation, bonding the vein walls and producing an immediate mechanical occlusion. The reaction is mildly exothermic but generates only a small temperature rise, far below the threshold associated with thermal tissue injury.
Delivery is continuous: adhesive is dispensed steadily while the catheter is withdrawn under ultrasound guidance and the sonographer applies external compression over the treated segment. This technique aims at even adhesive distribution and gap-free wall apposition along the entire trunk.
Over the following months, the occluded vein undergoes a fibrotic remodelling process and venous return is redirected through competent deep and superficial pathways. A firm, palpable cord along the treated segment during early follow-up is an expected finding.
Technical specifications
Configurations may vary by market; refer to the Instructions for Use supplied with the device.
| Attribute | Specification |
|---|---|
| Adhesive | n-butyl-2-cyanoacrylate (NBCA); rapid anionic polymerisation on contact with blood |
| Catheter architecture | Dual lumen — 0.5 mm ID adhesive delivery lumen + 0.9 mm ID auxiliary lumen (guiding light or adjunct device) |
| Shaft | Braided reinforcement with PTFE-lined interior, 4F–6F outer diameter |
| Working length | 100 cm, with depth markings every 2 cm for controlled pull-back |
| Tip visualisation | Guiding-light option for transcutaneous tip localisation |
| Delivery mode | Continuous adhesive dispensing during pull-back, with external probe compression |
| Anaesthesia | Local anaesthetic at access site only; no tumescent anaesthesia |
| Setting | Outpatient / office-based, under duplex ultrasound guidance |
Design characteristics
Engineering choices and their clinical rationale.
Non-Thermal Mechanism
Closure is achieved by cyanoacrylate polymerisation, not heat. Thermal nerve injury and skin burns are avoided by design rather than by protective measures.
Non-Tumescent Protocol
Local anaesthetic at the access site only. No tumescent infiltration along the treated vein is required, removing the most injection-intensive step of thermal ablation.
Continuous Delivery
Adhesive is delivered continuously during controlled catheter pull-back with immediate external compression, aiming at uniform, gap-free wall apposition.
Duplex-Guided Precision
The entire procedure is performed under real-time duplex ultrasound. A guiding-light tip option supports transcutaneous localisation of the catheter tip.
Outpatient Workflow
Office-based procedure with same-day mobilisation. In the RIVIERA trial, mean access-to-sheath-removal time was 23.4 minutes.
No Mandatory Compression
In published VenaBlock® study protocols, compression stockings were not mandated post-procedure; use remains at physician discretion.
Indications
- ✓Great saphenous vein (GSV) incompetence
- ✓Small saphenous vein (SSV) incompetence
- ✓Anterior accessory saphenous vein (AASV) incompetence
- ✓Symptomatic varicose veins, CEAP C2–C6, with duplex-confirmed truncal reflux >0.5 s
Contraindications
- ✕Known hypersensitivity to cyanoacrylate adhesives
- ✕Acute superficial thrombophlebitis in the target vein
- ✕Acute deep vein thrombosis in the treated limb
- ✕Active infection at the planned access site
- ✕Sepsis or severe uncontrolled systemic disease (per physician assessment)
Published safety profile
In the 538-patient great saphenous vein cohort (Vascular, 2018), no deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, paresthesia or skin pigmentation was observed at 12 months.
In the prospective RIVIERA trial (Phlebology, 2021), reported adverse events were puncture-site infection in 17.2% of patients (5/29; three required drainage) and phlebitis in 7.7% (3/29); the authors highlight puncture-site care and longer follow-up as areas for further study.
For the cyanoacrylate closure class as a whole, pooled guideline data report hypersensitivity reactions to cyanoacrylate in approximately 6–7% of patients; screening for known cyanoacrylate allergy is advised before treatment (ESVS 2022).
Clinical documentation & training
IFU, published study reprints, procedure guides and hands-on training are available through INVAMED and its authorised distributors.