Endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) vs conventional surgery: Recurrence
Endovenous laser ablation showed no clear difference in clinical evidence of recurrence after 1 year compared with conventional surgery (low certainty).
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Endovenous laser ablation vs conventional surgery Clinical evidence of recurrence after 1 year · people requiring intervention for short saphenous vein varices Endovenous laser ablation showed no clear difference in clinical evidence of recurrence after 1 year compared with conventional surgery (low certainty). Endovenous ablation therapy (laser or radiofrequency) or foam sclerotherapy versus conventional surgical… (2016) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | OR 0.54 [0.17, 1.75] | 1 study · 99 participants | Low |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Endovenous ablation therapy (laser or radiofrequency) or foam sclerotherapy versus conventional surgical repair for short saphenous… 2016 · 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.