Long Term Risk of Clinical Recurrence After Endovenous Laser Ablation of the Great Saphenous Vein

2021 ◽  
Vol 62 (6) ◽  
pp. e85-e86
Author(s):  
Maarten Tol ◽  
Quinten Vos ◽  
Debby Knol-Loerakker ◽  
Ramona Bruins ◽  
Rolf Erkens ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Laser Ablation ◽  
Saphenous Vein ◽  
Great Saphenous Vein ◽  
Clinical Recurrence ◽  
Endovenous Laser Ablation

scholarly journals A randomized prospective long-term (>1 year) clinical trial comparing the efficacy and safety of radiofrequency ablation to 980 nm laser ablation of the great saphenous vein

2016 ◽  
Vol 32 (6) ◽  
pp. 415-424 ◽  
Author(s):  
Malcolm Sydnor ◽  
John Mavropoulos ◽  
Natalia Slobodnik ◽  
Luke Wolfe ◽  
Brian Strife ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Patient Satisfaction ◽  
Radiofrequency Ablation ◽  
Laser Ablation ◽  
Saphenous Vein ◽  
Great Saphenous Vein ◽  
Clinical Severity ◽  
Endovenous Laser Ablation ◽  
Venous Clinical Severity Score ◽  
Superficial Venous Insufficiency

Purpose To compare the short- and long-term (>1 year) efficacy and safety of radiofrequency ablation (ClosureFAST™) versus endovenous laser ablation (980 nm diode laser) for the treatment of superficial venous insufficiency of the great saphenous vein. Materials and methods Two hundred patients with superficial venous insufficiency of the great saphenous vein were randomized to receive either radiofrequency ablation or endovenous laser ablation (and simultaneous adjunctive therapies for surface varicosities when appropriate). Post-treatment sonographic and clinical assessment was conducted at one week, six weeks, and six months for closure, complications, and patient satisfaction. Clinical assessment of each patient was conducted at one year and then at yearly intervals for patient satisfaction. Results Post-procedure pain ( p < 0.0001) and objective post-procedure bruising ( p = 0.0114) were significantly lower in the radiofrequency ablation group. Improvements in venous clinical severity score were noted through six months in both groups (endovenous laser ablation 6.6 to 1; radiofrequency ablation 6.2 to 1) with no significant difference in venous clinical severity score ( p = 0.4066) or measured adverse effects; 89 endovenous laser ablation and 87 radiofrequency patients were interviewed at least 12 months out with a mean long-term follow-up of 44 and 42 months ( p = 0.1096), respectively. There were four treatment failures in each group, and every case was correctable with further treatment. Overall, there were no significant differences with regard to patient satisfaction between radiofrequency ablation and endovenous laser ablation ( p = 0.3009). There were no cases of deep venous thrombosis in either group at any time during this study. Conclusions Radiofrequency ablation and endovenous laser ablation are highly effective and safe from both anatomic and clinical standpoints over a multi-year period and neither modality achieved superiority over the other.

Endovenous laser ablation of the great saphenous vein versus high ligation: long-term results

2013 ◽  
Vol 29 (2) ◽  
pp. 765-771 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohammad Mozafar ◽  
Khashayar Atqiaee ◽  
Hamidreza Haghighatkhah ◽  
Morteza Sanei Taheri ◽  
Ali Tabatabaey ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Laser Ablation ◽  
Saphenous Vein ◽  
Great Saphenous Vein ◽  
Long Term Results ◽  
High Ligation ◽  
Endovenous Laser Ablation

Which endovenous ablation method does offer a better long-term technical success in the treatment of the incompetent great saphenous vein? Review

Vascular ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 24 (6) ◽  
pp. 649-657 ◽  
Author(s):  
Renata Balint ◽  
Akos Farics ◽  
Krisztina Parti ◽  
Laszlo Vizsy ◽  
Jozsef Batorfi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Radiofrequency Ablation ◽  
Laser Ablation ◽  
Saphenous Vein ◽  
Great Saphenous Vein ◽  
Success Rates ◽  
Technical Success ◽  
Ultrasound Guided ◽  
Foam Sclerotherapy ◽  
Endovenous Laser Ablation

Objective The aim of this review article was to evaluate the long-term technical success rates of the known endovenous ablation procedures in the treatment of the incompetence of the great saphenous vein. Methods A literature search was conducted in the PubMed-database until the 5 January 2016. All publications with four to five years follow-up were eligible. Meta-analysis was performed by the IVhet-model. Results Eight hundred and sixty-two unique publications were found; 17 of them were appropriate for meta-analysis. Overall, 1420 limbs were included in the trial, 939 for endovenous laser ablation, 353 for radiofrequency ablation and 128 for ultrasound guided foam sclerotherapy. Overall, technical success rates were 84.8% for endovenous laser ablation, 88.7% for radiofrequency ablation and 32.8% for ultrasound guided foam sclerotherapy. There were no significant differences between endovenous laser ablation, radiofrequency ablation and ultrasound guided foam sclerotherapy regarding the great saphenous vein reopening ( p = 0.66; OR: 0.22; 95% of CI: 0.08–0.62 for radiofrequency ablation vs. endovenous laser ablation; p = 0.96; OR: 0.11; 95% of CI: 0.06–0.20 for endovenous laser ablation vs. ultrasound guided foam sclerotherapy; p = 0.93; OR: 3.20; 95% of CI: 0.54–18.90 for ultrasound guided foam sclerotherapy vs. radiofrequency ablation). Conclusion Both endovenous laser ablation and radiofrequency ablation are efficient in great saphenous vein occlusion on the long term. Lacking long-conducted large trials, the efficacy and reliability of ultrasound guided foam sclerotherapy to treat great saphenous vein-reflux is not affirmed.

Endovenous laser ablation with and without high ligation compared to high ligation and stripping for treatment of great saphenous varicose veins: Results of a multicentre randomised controlled trial with up to 6 years follow-up

2014 ◽  
Vol 31 (1) ◽  
pp. 23-33 ◽  
Author(s):  
I Flessenkämper ◽  
M Hartmann ◽  
K Hartmann ◽  
D Stenger ◽  
S Roll
Keyword(s):  
Laser Ablation ◽  
Saphenous Vein ◽  
Great Saphenous Vein ◽  
High Ligation ◽  
Rank Test ◽  
Clinical Recurrence ◽  
Endovenous Laser Ablation ◽  
Treatment Groups ◽  
Saphenofemoral Junction

Objectives High ligation and stripping was compared to endovenous laser ablation for the therapy of great saphenous vein varicosity. Long-term efficacy was assessed in terms of avoidance of inguinal reflux and mechanisms of recurrence were investigated. Design Multicentre, randomised, three-arm, parallel trial. Materials and methods A total of 449 patients were randomised into three different treatment groups: high ligation and stripping group ( n = 159), endovenous laser ablation group ( n = 142; 980 nm, 30 W continuous mode, bare fibre) or a combination of laser ablation with high ligation (endovenous laser ablation group/ high ligation group, n = 148). Patients were examined clinically and by duplex ultrasound once a year. The primary end point of this study is inguinal reflux at the saphenofemoral junction after 2 years. This paper presents secondary data on sonographically determined inguinal reflux and clinical recurrences in the treated area after up to 6 years of follow-up. Results Median time to follow-up was 4.0 years; the mean time follow-up 3.6 years. Follow-up rates were: 2 years 74%, 3 years 47%, 4 years 39%, 5 years 36% and 6 years 31%. Most reflux into the great saphenous vein appeared in the endovenous laser ablation group (after 6 years: high ligation/stripping versus endovenous laser ablation p = 0.0102; high ligation/endovenous laser ablation vs. endovenous laser ablation p < 0.0002). Furthermore, more refluxive side branches were also observed in the endovenous laser ablation group (after 6 years high ligation/stripping vs. endovenous laser ablation p = 0.0569; high ligation/endovenous laser ablation vs. endovenous laser ablation p = 0.0111). In terms of clinical recurrence during the 6 years post therapy, no significant differences between the three treatment groups were observed ( p values from log-rank test: high ligation/stripping vs. endovenous laser ablation p = 0.5479; high ligation/stripping vs. high ligation/endovenous laser ablation p = 0.2324; high ligation/endovenous laser ablation vs. endovenous laser ablation p = 0.0848). The postoperative decline and later development in Class C (clinical etiological anatomical pathological) went parallel in all groups. Conclusions Clinical recurrence appears with the same frequency in all three treatment groups, but the responsible pathological mechanisms seem to differ. Most reflux into the great saphenous vein and side branches appears after endovenous laser ablation, whereas more saphenofemoral junction-independent recurrences are seen after high ligation/stripping.

scholarly journals Corrigendum to the clinical significance of below-knee great saphenous vein reflux following endovenous laser ablation of above-knee great saphenous vein

2015 ◽  
Vol 30 (7) ◽  
pp. 500-500
Keyword(s):  
Laser Ablation ◽  
Clinical Significance ◽  
Saphenous Vein ◽  
Great Saphenous Vein ◽  
Endovenous Laser Ablation ◽  
Vein Reflux

The clinical significance of below-knee great saphenous vein reflux following endovenous laser ablation of above-knee great saphenous vein, by NS Theivacumar, RJ Darwood, D Dellagrammaticas, AID Mavor, MJ Gough, Phlebology DOI:10.1258/phleb.2008.008004, published February 2009; 24 (1): 17–20 . The authors would like to note the following correction to their article: One of the co-authors’ names was misspelled; it appears as “Dellegrammaticas”; however, it should be spelt “Dellagrammaticas”.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document