What do systematic reviews say?

Ultrasound‐guided foam sclerotherapy vs conventional surgery

• Endovenous ablation therapy (laser or radiofrequency) or foam sclerotherapy versus conventional surgical repair for… 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  1 study · 31 participants
  GRADE not reported

Ultrasound‐guided foam sclerotherapy vs conventional surgery

• Endovenous ablation therapy (laser or radiofrequency) or foam sclerotherapy versus conventional surgical repair for… 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  1 study · 31 participants
  GRADE not reported

Ultrasound‐guided foam sclerotherapy vs conventional surgery

• Endovenous ablation therapy (laser or radiofrequency) or foam sclerotherapy versus conventional surgical repair for… 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  1 study · 33 participants
  GRADE not reported
• Endovenous ablation therapy (laser or radiofrequency) or foam sclerotherapy versus conventional surgical repair for… 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  1 study · 31 participants
  GRADE not reported

Ultrasound‐guided foam sclerotherapy vs conventional surgery

• Endovenous ablation therapy (laser or radiofrequency) or foam sclerotherapy versus conventional surgical repair for… 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  1 study · 31 participants
  GRADE not reported

Ultrasound‐guided foam sclerotherapy vs conventional surgery

Ultrasound‐guided foam sclerotherapy showed no clear difference in recanalisation or persistence of reflux at 6 weeks compared with conventional surgery (low certainty).

• Endovenous ablation therapy (laser or radiofrequency) or foam sclerotherapy versus conventional surgical repair for… 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  OR 0.34 [0.06, 2.1]
  1 study · 33 participants
  Low

Ultrasound‐guided foam sclerotherapy vs conventional surgery

Ultrasound‐guided foam sclerotherapy showed no clear difference in recurrence of reflux at 1 year compared with conventional surgery (low certainty).

• Endovenous ablation therapy (laser or radiofrequency) or foam sclerotherapy versus conventional surgical repair for… 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  OR 1.19 [0.29, 4.92]
  1 study · 31 participants
  Low

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