What do systematic reviews say?

Laser plus sclerotherapy vs sclerotherapy (any sclerosant)

• Treatment for telangiectasias and reticular veins 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  2 studies · 710 participants
  Low

Laser plus sclerotherapy vs sclerotherapy (any sclerosant)

Laser plus sclerotherapy showed no clear difference in adverse events ‐ Hyperpigmentation ( compared with sclerotherapy (low certainty).

• Treatment for telangiectasias and reticular veins 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.83 [0.35, 1.99]
  2 studies · 656 participants
  Low

Laser plus sclerotherapy vs sclerotherapy (any sclerosant)

Laser plus sclerotherapy showed no clear difference in adverse events ‐ matting ( compared with sclerotherapy (low certainty).

• Treatment for telangiectasias and reticular veins 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.83 [0.21, 3.28]
  2 studies · 656 participants
  Low

Laser plus sclerotherapy vs sclerotherapy (any sclerosant)

Laser plus sclerotherapy may leads to higher pain ( compared with sclerotherapy (low certainty).

• Treatment for telangiectasias and reticular veins 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 2.44 [1.69, 3.55]
  1 study · 596 participants
  Low

Laser plus sclerotherapy vs sclerotherapy (any sclerosant)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Treatment for telangiectasias and reticular veins 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

Laser plus sclerotherapy vs sclerotherapy (any sclerosant)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Treatment for telangiectasias and reticular veins 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

Laser plus sclerotherapy vs sclerotherapy (any sclerosant)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Treatment for telangiectasias and reticular veins 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

Laser therapy vs sclerotherapy (any sclerosant)

• Treatment for telangiectasias and reticular veins 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  5 studies · 593 participants
  Moderate

Laser therapy vs sclerotherapy (any sclerosant)

Laser probably leads to lower adverse events ‐ hyperpigmentation ( compared with sclerotherapy (moderate certainty).

• Treatment for telangiectasias and reticular veins 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.57 [0.4, 0.8]
  4 studies · 262 participants
  Moderate

Laser therapy vs sclerotherapy (any sclerosant)

Laser showed no clear difference in adverse events ‐ matting ( compared with sclerotherapy (moderate certainty).

• Treatment for telangiectasias and reticular veins 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 1 [0.46, 2.19]
  2 studies · 162 participants
  Moderate

Laser therapy vs sclerotherapy (any sclerosant)

• Treatment for telangiectasias and reticular veins 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  2 studies · 100 participants
  Low

Laser therapy vs sclerotherapy (any sclerosant)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Treatment for telangiectasias and reticular veins 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

Laser therapy vs sclerotherapy (any sclerosant)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Treatment for telangiectasias and reticular veins 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

Laser therapy vs sclerotherapy (any sclerosant)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Treatment for telangiectasias and reticular veins 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

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

Endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) vs conventional surgery

Endovenous laser ablation probably leads to lower recanalisation or persistence of reflux at 6 weeks compared with conventional surgery (moderate certainty).

• Endovenous ablation therapy (laser or radiofrequency) or foam sclerotherapy versus conventional surgical repair for… 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  OR 0.07 [0.02, 0.22]
  3 studies · 289 participants
  Moderate