ArticleDermatologic therapy2022
Comparative analysis of endovenous laser ablation versus ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy for the treatment of venous leg ulcers.
Article in Dermatologic therapy, 2022. 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, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative analysis of endovenous laser ablation versus ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy for the treatment of venous leg ulcers.Dermatologic therapy · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Endovenous thermal and non-thermal therapeutic approaches have become standard of care for the treatment of venous insufficiency. However, comparative studies on its use in the population of venous leg ulcer patients are scarce. The present study aimed at a comparison of the efficacy of endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) and ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy (UGFS) for the treatment of venous leg ulcers (VUs). We retrospectively analyzed patient records of 68 patients with active VUs (C6 of the CEAP-classification), who underwent EVLA (n = 33) or UGFS (n = 35) between January 2001 and January 2021. In 68 patients, 97 venous segments (GSV: 43, SSV: 17, NSV: 37) were treated. Ulcer surface area at initial presentation did not differ significantly between both treatment groups (EVLA: 7.7 ± 10.7 vs. UGFS: 8.5 ± 16.3 cm
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.