Foam vs sclerotherapy (any sclerosant): Adverse events ‐ matting (
Foam may leads to higher adverse events ‐ matting ( compared with sclerotherapy (any sclerosant) (low certainty).
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Foam vs sclerotherapy (any sclerosant) Adverse events ‐ matting ( · people with telangiectasias and reticular veins Foam may leads to higher adverse events ‐ matting ( compared with sclerotherapy (any sclerosant) (low certainty). Treatment for telangiectasias and reticular veins (2021) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | RR 6.12 [1.04, 35.98] | 2 studies · 187 participants | Low |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Treatment for telangiectasias and reticular veins 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | Not reported | list not extracted yet | Not assessed |
Studies behind the findings
None of these reviews ties its included studies to this outcome in the data here. Cochrane reviews and reviews with headline outcomes only do not list their studies yet.
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.