What do systematic reviews say?

Endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) vs foam sclerotherapy

It is very uncertain whether endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) changes long‐term recurrence (> 5 years) compared with ultrasound‐guided foam sclerotherapy (UGFS) (very low certainty).

• Interventions for great saphenous vein incompetence 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  OR 1.08 [0.4, 2.87]
  2 studies · 418 participants
  Very low

Endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) vs foam sclerotherapy

• Interventions for great saphenous vein incompetence 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  Very low

Endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) vs foam sclerotherapy

• Interventions for great saphenous vein incompetence 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  Moderate

Endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) vs foam sclerotherapy

Endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) showed no clear difference in technical success (< 5 years) compared with ultrasound‐guided foam sclerotherapy (UGFS) (low certainty).

• Interventions for great saphenous vein incompetence 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  OR 6.13 [0.98, 38.27]
  3 studies · 588 participants
  Low
• Interventions for great saphenous vein incompetence 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  OR 6.47 [2.6, 16.1]
  3 studies · 534 participants
  Low

Endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) vs foam sclerotherapy

It is very uncertain whether endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) changes recurrence (< 5 years) compared with ultrasound‐guided foam sclerotherapy (UGFS) (very low certainty).

• Interventions for great saphenous vein incompetence 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  OR 0.68 [0.2, 2.36]
  2 studies · 443 participants
  Very low