Cochrane · systematic review · CD010878
Endovenous ablation therapy (laser or radiofrequency) or foam sclerotherapy versus conventional surgical repair for short saphenous varicose veins
Paravastu, SCV, Horne, M, Dodd, PDF · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2016 · Cochrane Library
VascularAMSTAR 2: not assessed
SoF tableOnly the outcomes this review put in its Summary of Findings table are listed (the Cochrane Handbook caps them at about seven per comparison). Its other analyses are not shown here.
Questions
14
current version
GRADE rated
9
No studies
0
Included studies
NR
No studies 0 · 0%Ungraded 5 · 35.7%Very low 0 · 0%Low 5 · 35.7%Moderate 4 · 28.6%High 0 · 0%
Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.
Questions and results
Endovenous laser ablation compared to conventional surgery for short saphenous vein varices
Population: people requiring intervention for short saphenous vein varices
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Recanalisation or persistence of reflux at 6 weeks Endovenous laser ablation vs conventional surgery | OR 0.07 [0.02, 0.22] | 3 studies · 289 participants | Moderate Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Recurrence of reflux at 1 year Endovenous laser ablation vs conventional surgery | OR 0.24 [0.07, 0.77] | 2 studies · 119 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness |
Clinical evidence of recurrence after 1 year Endovenous laser ablation vs conventional surgery | OR 0.54 [0.17, 1.75] | 1 study · 99 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Reintervention (due to technical failure) Endovenous laser ablation vs conventional surgery | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 99 participants | Moderate Downgraded: imprecision |
Disease‐specific QoL (AVVQ) at 6 weeks Endovenous laser ablation vs conventional surgery | no estimate extracted | 2 studies · 265 participants | Moderate Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Disease‐specific QoL (AVVQ) at 1 year Endovenous laser ablation vs conventional surgery | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 99 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Complications at 6 weeks Endovenous laser ablation vs conventional surgery | no estimate extracted | 2 studies · 265 participants | Moderate Downgraded: imprecision |
Ultrasound‐guided foam sclerotherapy compared to conventional surgery for short saphenous vein varices
Population: people requiring intervention for short saphenous vein varices
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Recanalisation or persistence of reflux at 6 weeks Ultrasound‐guided foam sclerotherapy vs conventional surgery | OR 0.34 [0.06, 2.1] | 1 study · 33 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Recurrence of reflux at 1 year Ultrasound‐guided foam sclerotherapy vs conventional surgery | OR 1.19 [0.29, 4.92] | 1 study · 31 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Clinical evidence of recurrence after 1 year Ultrasound‐guided foam sclerotherapy vs conventional surgery | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 31 participants | Ungraded |
Reintervention (due to technical failure) Ultrasound‐guided foam sclerotherapy vs conventional surgery | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 31 participants | Ungraded |
Disease‐specific QoL (AVVQ) at 6 weeks Ultrasound‐guided foam sclerotherapy vs conventional surgery | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 33 participants | Ungraded |
Disease‐specific QoL (AVVQ) at 1 year Ultrasound‐guided foam sclerotherapy vs conventional surgery | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 31 participants | Ungraded |
Complications at 1 year Ultrasound‐guided foam sclerotherapy vs conventional surgery | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 31 participants | Ungraded |