ArticleCureus2023
Comparison of Foam and Liquid Sclerotherapy for the Treatment of Lower Extremity Varicose Veins and Telangiectasia in Obese Patients.
Article in Cureus, 2023. 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Impact of Inflammatory Markers and Obesity in Chronic Venous Disease.Biomedicines · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveSclerotherapy is an accepted treatment modality for reticular varicose veins and telangiectasia. We aimed to compare the success and safety of foam and liquid sclerotherapy in obese patients with lower extremity varicose veins and telangiectasia.
methodsThe present study was performed in a non-randomized prospective manner, and obese patients with lower extremity varicose veins (patients with anatomy and pathophysiology classification {CEAP} class C1) and telangiectasia treated with foam sclerotherapy and liquid sclerotherapy were enrolled into the study. Patients treated with foam sclerotherapy and liquid sclerotherapy were compared with regard to preoperative parameters, procedure success, Visual Analog Score (VAS), patient satisfaction, and complications.
resultsThe VAS scores at the first hour and sixth hour were statistically higher in the foam sclerotherapy group (p=0.001 and p=0.001, respectively). The success rate after the first session was 88.2% in the foam sclerotherapy group and 69.4% in the liquid sclerotherapy group (p=0.008). After all sessions, the success rates were similar between groups (p=0.607). The foam sclerotherapy group required an average of 1.1 sessions, while the liquid sclerotherapy group required 1.4 sessions (p=0.001). At the third-month follow-up, the success rate was significantly higher in the foam sclerotherapy group than liquid sclerotherapy group (91.2% and 77.4%; p= 0.030). In the foam sclerotherapy group, 80.9% of the patients were very satisfied, while this rate was 58.1% in the liquid group (p=0.012). The rates of ecchymosis and hyperpigmentation in the first week after the procedure were significantly higher in the foam sclerotherapy group (p=0.003 and p=0.040, respectively).
conclusionOur findings showed that foam sclerotherapy had a significantly higher success rate after the first session, and third month follow-up with higher patient satisfaction. In contrast, liquid sclerotherapy had significantly lower VAS scores in the first and sixth hours following the procedure and had lower ecchymosis and hyperpigmentation in the first week after the procedure.
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.