Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

4,751 questions · 12,775 findings · 807 reviews · Headline outcomes only

Sort:Best matchNewest Highest certainty Download CSV

No studies found 3,413 · 26.7%GRADE not reported 709 · 5.5%Very low 3,483 · 27.3%Low 3,165 · 24.8%Moderate 1,628 · 12.7%High 377 · 3%

Ranked among the 5,000 newest matching findings; add words or filters to narrow the search.

Endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) vs SFJ ligation and stripping (HL/S)

QoL · people with GSV incompetence

1 finding from 1 review

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

Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) vs mechanochemical ablation (MOCA)

Technical success · people with GSV incompetence

Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) showed no clear difference in technical success (< 5 years) compared with mechanochemical ablation (MOCA) (low certainty).

2 findings from 1 review

Interventions for great saphenous vein incompetence 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
OR 1.76 [0.06, 54.15]
3 studies · 435 participants
Low
Interventions for great saphenous vein incompetence 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found

Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) vs mechanochemical ablation (MOCA)

Recurrence · people with GSV incompetence

Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) showed no clear difference in recurrence (< 5 years) compared with mechanochemical ablation (MOCA) (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Interventions for great saphenous vein incompetence 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
OR 1 [0.21, 4.81]
3 studies · 389 participants
Low

Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) vs mechanochemical ablation (MOCA)

Long‐term recurrence (> 5 years) · people with GSV incompetence

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Interventions for great saphenous vein incompetence 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found

Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) vs mechanochemical ablation (MOCA)

Complications (up to 1 year) · people with GSV incompetence

1 finding from 1 review

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

Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) vs mechanochemical ablation (MOCA)

QoL · people with GSV incompetence

1 finding from 1 review

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

Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) vs SFJ ligation and stripping (HL/S)

Technical success · people with GSV incompetence

Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) showed no clear difference in technical success (< 5 years) compared with SFJ ligation and stripping (HL/S) (low certainty).

2 findings from 1 review

Interventions for great saphenous vein incompetence 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
OR 5.71 [0.64, 50.81]
2 studies · 318 participants
Low
Interventions for great saphenous vein incompetence 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
OR 0.88 [0.29, 2.69]
1 study · 289 participants
Low

Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) vs SFJ ligation and stripping (HL/S)

Recurrence · people with GSV incompetence

Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) showed no clear difference in recurrence (< 5 years) compared with SFJ ligation and stripping (HL/S) (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Interventions for great saphenous vein incompetence 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
OR 0.93 [0.58, 1.51]
4 studies · 546 participants
Moderate

Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) vs SFJ ligation and stripping (HL/S)

Long‐term recurrence (> 5 years) · people with GSV incompetence

Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) may leads to lower long‐term recurrence (> 5 years) compared with SFJ ligation and stripping (HL/S) (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Interventions for great saphenous vein incompetence 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
OR 0.41 [0.22, 0.75]
1 study · 289 participants
Low

Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) vs SFJ ligation and stripping (HL/S)

Complications (up to 8 years) · people with GSV incompetence

1 finding from 1 review

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

Endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) vs radiofrequency ablation

Recurrence · people with GSV incompetence

Endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) showed no clear difference in recurrence (< 5 years) compared with radiofrequency ablation (RFA) (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Interventions for great saphenous vein incompetence 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
OR 1.53 [0.78, 2.99]
1 study · 291 participants
Low

Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) vs SFJ ligation and stripping (HL/S)

QoL · people with GSV incompetence

1 finding from 1 review

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

Ultrasound‐guided foam sclerotherapy vs SFJ ligation and stripping (HL/S)

Technical success · people with GSV incompetence

Ultrasound‐guided foam sclerotherapy (UGFS) may leads to lower technical success (< 5 years) compared with SFJ ligation and stripping (HL/S) (low certainty).

2 findings from 1 review

Interventions for great saphenous vein incompetence 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
OR 0.32 [0.11, 0.94]
4 studies · 954 participants
Low
Interventions for great saphenous vein incompetence 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
OR 0.09 [0.03, 0.3]
3 studies · 525 participants
Moderate

Ultrasound‐guided foam sclerotherapy vs SFJ ligation and stripping (HL/S)

Recurrence · people with GSV incompetence

Ultrasound‐guided foam sclerotherapy (UGFS) showed no clear difference in recurrence (< 5 years) compared with SFJ ligation and stripping (HL/S) (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Interventions for great saphenous vein incompetence 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
OR 1.81 [0.87, 3.77]
3 studies · 822 participants
Low

Ultrasound‐guided foam sclerotherapy vs SFJ ligation and stripping (HL/S)

Long‐term recurrence (> 5 years) · people with GSV incompetence

Ultrasound‐guided foam sclerotherapy (UGFS) showed no clear difference in long‐term recurrence (≥ 5 years) compared with SFJ ligation and stripping (HL/S) (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Interventions for great saphenous vein incompetence 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
OR 1.24 [0.57, 2.71]
3 studies · 639 participants
Low

Ultrasound‐guided foam sclerotherapy vs SFJ ligation and stripping (HL/S)

Complications (up to 8 years) · people with GSV incompetence

1 finding from 1 review

Interventions for great saphenous vein incompetence 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
3 studies · 639 participants
Very low

Ultrasound‐guided foam sclerotherapy vs SFJ ligation and stripping (HL/S)

QoL · people with GSV incompetence

1 finding from 1 review

Interventions for great saphenous vein incompetence 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
4 studies · 930 participants
Moderate

Endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) vs radiofrequency ablation

Long‐term recurrence (> 5 years) · people with GSV incompetence

Endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) may leads to higher long‐term recurrence (> 5 years) compared with radiofrequency ablation (RFA) (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Interventions for great saphenous vein incompetence 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
OR 2.77 [1.52, 5.06]
1 study · 291 participants
Low

Endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) vs radiofrequency ablation

Complications (up to 8 years) · people with GSV incompetence

1 finding from 1 review

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

Endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) vs radiofrequency ablation

QoL · people with GSV incompetence

1 finding from 1 review

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