ArticleMedicine2020
A retrospective cohort study comparing two treatments for active venous leg ulcers.
Article in Medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Endovenous Laser Ablation-Phlebectomy-Sclerotherapy Hybrid Treatment for Venous Insufficiency: A Case Report.Cureus · 2023Article
- Comparative analysis of endovenous laser ablation versus ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy for the treatment of venous leg ulcers.Dermatologic therapy · 2022Article
- Comparison of the effect of combination therapies in the treatment of large varicose ulcers: A real-world cohort study.Science progressArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) and ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy (UGFS) have largely replaced traditional surgery for treatment of varicose veins (VVs) with active venous leg ulcers (VLUs), and multiple combined modes have emerged. A retrospective cohort study was performed to compare the effect of traditional surgery (high ligation and stripping followed with compression [compression plus HL-S]) to high ligation-endovenous laser ablation-foam sclerotherapy followed with compression (compression plus HL-EVLA-FS) on the treatment of active VLUs.Data of active VLUs treated in our center from 2008 to 2017 and followed up for 1 year were analyzed. The intervention measures in the first 5 years were compression plus HL-S, and in the following 5 years were compression plus HL-EVLA-FS. The primary outcome was ulcer healing time. The secondary outcomes were the VVs occlusion and clinical success as assessed by a change in venous clinical severity score (VCSS) and complications.The study included 120 patients and 200 patients treated with HL-S and HL-EVLA-FS, respectively, during 2008 to 2017. The average ulcer healing time were 2.3 ± 2.4 and 1.7 ± 1.7 months, respectively. Significant difference was found in the cumulative ulcers healing rate between the two groups (Hazard ratio [HR] and 95% confidence interval [CI] was respectively 1.458 and 1.140-1.865, P = .0002), but no difference was found in the VVs occlusion (HR and 95% CI was respectively 1.005 and 0.774-1.3071, P = .967). Significant difference occurred in 6 months and 12 months post-operatively in the VCSS change and in the procedure data and some complications between the 2 groups.In conclusion, the treatment of HL-EVLA-FS can accelerate the healing of VLUs, improve the VCSS and present superior procedure data. However, no advantage could be found in the VVs occlusion compared with control group.
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.