ArticleLasers in medical science2022
No significant difference between 1940 and 1470 nm in endovenous laser ablation using an in vitro porcine liver model.
Article in Lasers in medical science, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Endovenous laser ablation using laser systems emitting at wavelengths > 1900 nm: a systematic review.Lasers in medical science · 2022Pooled it
- Comparative study between endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) with 1940 nm versus EVLA with 1470 nm for treatment of incompetent great saphenous vein and short saphenous vein: A randomized controlled trial.Journal of vascular surgery. Venous and lymphatic disorders · 2025Trial
- Endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) for vein insufficiency: two-year results of a multicenter experience with 1940-nm laser diode and a novel optical fiber.Lasers in medical science · 2024Trial
- Endovascular laser treatment. Comparison of lasers and fibers of different generations: study of temperatures and tissue damage produced on a porcine liver model.Lasers in medical science · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Current endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) practice favours 1470 nm, as water is a major chromophore for this wavelength. Water has a greater affinity for 1940 nm, leading to claims that lower powers or linear endovenous energy densities (LEEDs) are needed. We compared the thermal spread and carbonisation of EVLA using these two wavelengths, in the porcine liver model. Using the previously validated porcine liver model, we performed 5 treatments, at each power: 2 W, 4 W, 6 W, 8 W and 10 W using a standard pullback of 8 s/cm. This gave LEEDs for each wavelength of 16, 32, 48, 64 and 80 J/cm. Digital images were given random codes and analysed by two blinded observers. Thermal spread was measured using "SketchandCalc" online software and graded carbonisation from 0 (none) to 3 (black carbon tract). There was no significant difference in thermal spread between the two wavelengths at 6 W, 8 W and 10 W. At 2 W, the 1470-nm laser had a significantly increased thermal spread over the 1940 nm. Significantly more carbonisation was found with the 1940-nm laser compared to 1470 nm. In this model, there was no significant difference in thermal spread at powers of 6 W and more. At 2 W and potentially 4 W, 1470 nm showed spread than 1940 nm, due to increased absorption at the device/tissue interface. At powers and LEEDs used for saphenous ablation, we found no evidence to support reduced power or LEED when using 1940 nm. However, 1940 nm may be more advantageous than 1470 nm when ablating small thin-walled veins, near to the skin.
Indexed as
Identifiers
34687391What 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.