Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Effects of Different Mixing Agents on the Stability of Sodium Tetradecyl Sulfate (STS) Foam: An Experimental Study

  • Laboratory Investigation
  • Published:
CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

To evaluate the effect of air, CO2 and contrast medium-air on the dwell time (DT) stability of sodium tetradecyl sulfate (STS) foam.

Materials and Methods

Three types of foam sclerosants (air-foam, CO2-foam, contrast-air-foam) were injected eight times into an inclined straight plastic tube (internal diameters 4 mm and 10 mm) filled with a blood substitute. Injections were captured by CCD camera, and images were transferred for digital analysis and calculation of DT.

Results

Contrast-air-foam and air-foam in a 4-mm tube showed 5.6-/3.3-fold greater DT compared to CO2-foam, respectively (P = 0.001). Contrast-air-foam in a 10-mm tube showed 2.1-fold greater DT compared to CO2-foam (P = 0.0167).

Conclusion

A mixture of air and iodinated contrast improves the stability of STS foam compared to mixtures using only air or CO2. Further, animal and clinical studies are needed to validate this in vitro result.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Tessari L, Cavezzi A, Frullini A. Preliminary experience with a new sclerosing foam in the treatment of varicose veins. Dermatol Surg. 2001;27:58–60. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-4725.2001.00192.x.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Mimura H, Fujiwara H, Hiraki T, et al. Polidocanol sclerotherapy for painful venous malformations: evaluation of safety and efficacy in pain relief. Eur Radiol. 2009;19:2474–80. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-009-1442-2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Li L, Zeng X-Q, Li Y-H. Digital subtraction angiography-guided foam sclerotherapy of peripheral venous malformations. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010;194:W439–44. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.09.3416.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Li K, Liu Y-R, Chen A-W, Liu S-H. A new method for using radiopaque sclerosing foam to treat venous malformations. Dermatol Surg. 2015;41:726–30. https://doi.org/10.1097/DSS.0000000000000363.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Carugo D, Ankrett DN, O’Byrne V, et al. A novel biomimetic analysis system for quantitative characterisation of sclerosing foams used for the treatment of varicose veins. J Mater Sci Mater Med. 2013;24:1417–23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10856-013-4913-6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Carugo D, Ankrett DN, O’Byrne V, et al. The role of clinically-relevant parameters on the cohesiveness of sclerosing foams in a biomimetic vein model. J Mater Sci Mater Med. 2015;26:1–10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10856-015-5587-z.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Pries AR, Neuhaus D, Gaehtgens P. Blood viscosity in tube flow: dependence on diameter and hematocrit. Am J Physiol. 1992;263:H1770–8.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Johnson LR. Essential medical physiology, 3rd edn. p 293; 2003.

  9. Erkin A, Kosemehmetoglu K, Diler MS, Koksal C. Evaluation of the minimum effective concentration of foam sclerosant in an ex vivo study. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2012;44:593–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejvs.2012.09.021.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Cavezzi A, Tessari L. Foam sclerotherapy techniques: different gases and methods of preparation, catheter versus direct injection. Phlebology. 2009;24:247–51. https://doi.org/10.1258/phleb.2009.009061.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Morrison N, Neuhardt DL, Rogers CR, et al. Comparisons of side effects using air and carbon dioxide foam for endovenous chemical ablation. J Vasc Surg. 2008;47:830–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvs.2007.11.020.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Cavezzi A, Tessari L. Foam sclerotherapy techniques: different gases and methods of preparation, catheter versus direct injection. Phlebology. 2009;24:247–51. https://doi.org/10.1258/phleb.2009.009061.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. McMaster S. Sodium tetradecyl sulphate foam stability prior to injection: factors affecting liquid reformation. Phlebology. 2011;26:222–6. https://doi.org/10.1258/phleb.2010.010025.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Valenzuela GC, Wong K, Connor DE, et al. Foam sclerosants are more stable at lower temperatures. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2013;46:593–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejvs.2013.08.012.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Parsi K, Exner T, Connor DE, et al. The lytic effects of detergent sclerosants on erythrocytes, platelets, endothelial cells and microparticles are attenuated by albumin and other plasma components in vitro. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2008;36:216–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejvs.2008.03.001.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Watkins MRR. Deactivation of sodium tetradecyl sulphate injection by blood proteins. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2011;41:521–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejvs.2010.12.012.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Hamel-Desnos C, Desnos P, Wollmann JC, et al. Evaluation of the efficacy of polidocanol in the form of foam compared with liquid form in sclerotherapy of the greater saphenous vein: initial results. Dermatol Surg. 2003;29:1170–5. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-4725.2003.29398.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Wollmann JC. Sclerosant foams: stabilities, physical properties and rheological behavior. Phlebologie. 2010;39:208–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors thank Younes Jahangiri, M.D., for assistance in taking photographs and maintaining the data for this study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Charles T. Dotter Department of Interventional Radiology, 3181 SW Sam Jackson Park Road, Portland, OR, 97239, USA

    Kazuki Hashimoto MD, Barry Uchida, Masahiro Horikawa & Khashayar Farsad

  2. Department of Radiology, St. Marianna University School of Medicine, Sugao 2-16-1, Miyamae, Kawasaki, 216-8511, Japan

    Kazuki Hashimoto MD & Hidefumi Mimura

Authors
  1. Kazuki Hashimoto MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Barry Uchida
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Masahiro Horikawa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Hidefumi Mimura
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Khashayar Farsad
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kazuki Hashimoto MD.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors. IRB approval was waved based upon the nature of the study.

Electronic Supplementary Material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 28 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hashimoto, K., Uchida, B., Horikawa, M. et al. Effects of Different Mixing Agents on the Stability of Sodium Tetradecyl Sulfate (STS) Foam: An Experimental Study. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 41, 1952–1957 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00270-018-2049-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00270-018-2049-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation