Observational studyAnnals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England2015
Neovascularisation is not an innocent bystander in recurrence after great saphenous vein surgery.
Observational study in Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThis study sought to establish the causes of failure of great saphenous vein surgery among patients in whom there was confidence that accurate saphenofemoral ligation had been carried and the great saphenous vein had been stripped at least to knee level.
methodsThis was an observational study of 100 limbs (66 patients) operated on by a single surgeon 5-22 years previously (mean: 12 years). The index operation was primary in 54 limbs and for recurrence in 46 limbs. Thirty-two patients were studied having been re-referred for recurrence while 34 were recalled for review. All were examined clinically and with duplex ultrasonography, and all completed questionnaires (Aberdeen varicose vein questionnaire [AVVQ] and EQ-5D-3L). In order to measure the extent of visible recurrence, a scoring system similar to that in the venous clinical severity score was used but with a range of 0-8.
resultsThere were visible varicosities in 77 of the 100 limbs. Duplex ultrasonography showed that recurrent saphenofemoral incompetence (SFI) was present in 27% of the limbs. This was judged to result from neovascularisation and was the most common source of reflux. AVVQ scores for the 27 limbs with recurrent SFI (median: 34, interquartile range [IQR]: 20-42) were higher than for the 73 with no recurrent SFI (median: 17, IQR: 11-29), which was a significant difference (Mann-Whitney U test, p<0.01). Analysing clinical scores with chi-squared tests indicated fewer visible varicosities in limbs without recurrent SFI than in those with recurrent SFI (p<0.01).
conclusionsNeovascularisation remains poorly understood but it cannot be considered an innocent bystander.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.