We have located links that may give you full text access.
Journal Article
Review
Endovenous laser ablation versus conventional surgery (ligation and stripping) for primary great saphenous varicose vein: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Annals of Medicine and Surgery 2023 September
BACKGROUND: The great saphenous varicose vein was managed with high ligation and stripping conventionally, but with the development of minimally invasive surgical techniques like endovascular laser ablation (EVLA), they have become popular. This systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials aim to compare the short-term and long-term outcomes of these two modalities on headings like procedural time, technical success, recovery time, recurrences, cost-effectiveness, and complications.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The protocol followed in this study was registered prospectively in the Registry of Systematic Reviews/Meta-analyses. Electronic databases were searched with appropriate search terms for relevant studies, and after their screening, data was extracted. The odds ratio was used for dichotomous data, and the mean difference or standardized mean difference was used for continuous variables.
RESULTS: This study identified 18 publications (10 randomized controlled trials) with a total of 1936 patients. There was no difference in procedural time, recovery time, recurrences at 1, 2, and 5 years, or clinical severity score. The surgery group had 4.35 times higher statistically significant odds of being technically successful at 2 years, while pooling data on bruising, hematoma, sensory disturbance, infection, and phlebitis showed that the EVLA group was less likely to develop postoperative complications.
CONCLUSION: Technical failures were more common in the EVLA, whereas postoperative complications were more common in the surgery group. Both have comparable clinical effectiveness, and neither modality has clear superiority over the other. Parameters like cost-effectiveness must be assessed at the hospital level before choosing the right procedure for the patients.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The protocol followed in this study was registered prospectively in the Registry of Systematic Reviews/Meta-analyses. Electronic databases were searched with appropriate search terms for relevant studies, and after their screening, data was extracted. The odds ratio was used for dichotomous data, and the mean difference or standardized mean difference was used for continuous variables.
RESULTS: This study identified 18 publications (10 randomized controlled trials) with a total of 1936 patients. There was no difference in procedural time, recovery time, recurrences at 1, 2, and 5 years, or clinical severity score. The surgery group had 4.35 times higher statistically significant odds of being technically successful at 2 years, while pooling data on bruising, hematoma, sensory disturbance, infection, and phlebitis showed that the EVLA group was less likely to develop postoperative complications.
CONCLUSION: Technical failures were more common in the EVLA, whereas postoperative complications were more common in the surgery group. Both have comparable clinical effectiveness, and neither modality has clear superiority over the other. Parameters like cost-effectiveness must be assessed at the hospital level before choosing the right procedure for the patients.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Consensus Statement on Vitamin D Status Assessment and Supplementation: Whys, Whens, and Hows.Endocrine Reviews 2024 April 28
The Tricuspid Valve: A Review of Pathology, Imaging, and Current Treatment Options: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.Circulation 2024 April 26
Intravenous infusion of dexmedetomidine during the surgery to prevent postoperative delirium and postoperative cognitive dysfunction undergoing non-cardiac surgery: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.European Journal of Medical Research 2024 April 19
Interstitial Lung Disease: A Review.JAMA 2024 April 23
Management of Diverticulitis: A Review.JAMA Surgery 2024 April 18
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app