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 · 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

Endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) vs conventional surgery

Endovenous laser ablation may leads to lower 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 0.24 [0.07, 0.77]
  2 studies · 119 participants
  Low

Endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) vs conventional surgery

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 repair for… 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  OR 0.54 [0.17, 1.75]
  1 study · 99 participants
  Low

Endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) 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 · 99 participants
  Moderate

Endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) 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
  2 studies · 265 participants
  Moderate
• Endovenous ablation therapy (laser or radiofrequency) or foam sclerotherapy versus conventional surgical repair for… 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  1 study · 99 participants
  Low

Endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) 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
  2 studies · 265 participants
  Moderate

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

Intervention not reported

• Surgical versus conservative interventions for treating anterior cruciate ligament injuries 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  1 study · 121 participants
  Low

Intervention not reported

• Surgical versus conservative interventions for treating anterior cruciate ligament injuries 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  1 study · 121 participants
  GRADE not reported

Intervention not reported

The intervention may leads to lower treatment failure (graft rupture or ACL reconstruction) at 2 years5 (low certainty).

• Surgical versus conservative interventions for treating anterior cruciate ligament injuries 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.12 [0.04, 0.34]
  1 study · 121 participants
  Low

Intervention not reported

The intervention showed no clear difference in treatment failure (meniscal surgery) at 5 years5,7 (low certainty).

• Surgical versus conservative interventions for treating anterior cruciate ligament injuries 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.88 [0.62, 1.25]
  1 study · 120 participants
  Low

Intervention not reported

• Surgical versus conservative interventions for treating anterior cruciate ligament injuries 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  1 study · 121 participants
  Low

Intervention not reported

The intervention showed no clear difference in return to activity or level of sport at 2 years (low certainty).

• Surgical versus conservative interventions for treating anterior cruciate ligament injuries 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 1.22 [0.78, 1.91]
  1 study · 121 participants
  Low

Intervention not reported

It is very uncertain whether the intervention changes osteoarthritis at 5 years (very low certainty).

• Surgical versus conservative interventions for treating anterior cruciate ligament injuries 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 1.8 [0.92, 3.52]
  1 study · 113 participants
  Very low

Imiquimod vs placebo

Summary of findings for imiquimod leads to higher response to treatment at 5 to 6 months ‐ overall response compared with placebo (high certainty).

• Medical and surgical interventions for the treatment of usual‐type vulval intraepithelial neoplasia 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 11.95 [3.21, 44.51]
  3 studies · 104 participants
  High

Imiquimod vs cidofovir

Summary of findings for imiquimod showed no clear difference in response to treatment at 6 months ‐ complete response compared with cidofovir (moderate certainty).

• Medical and surgical interventions for the treatment of usual‐type vulval intraepithelial neoplasia 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 1 [0.73, 1.37]
  1 study · 180 participants
  Moderate

Imiquimod vs cidofovir

Summary of findings for imiquimod showed no clear difference in pain ‐ any grade compared with cidofovir (moderate certainty).

• Medical and surgical interventions for the treatment of usual‐type vulval intraepithelial neoplasia 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 1.16 [0.92, 1.47]
  1 study · 168 participants
  Moderate