ArticleJournal of vascular surgery. Venous and lymphatic disorders2024
Clinical outcomes of nonthermal ablation, thermal ablation, and surgical stripping for varicose veins.
Article in Journal of vascular surgery. Venous and lymphatic disorders, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Efficacy and safety of cyanoacrylate ablation vs endovenous radiofrequency ablation for varicose veins in chronic great saphenous vein insufficiency: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of vascular surgery. Venous and lymphatic disorders · 2026Pooled it
- Algorithm to Select the Treatment Modality for the Incompetent Saphenous Vein.Vascular specialist international · 2025Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe purpose of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes of radiofrequency ablation (RFA), cyanoacrylate closure (CAC), mechanochemical ablation (MOCA), and surgical stripping (SS) for incompetent saphenous veins and to determine a suitable treatment modality for a specific clinical situation.
methodsWe retrospectively reviewed the data of patients with varicose veins who underwent RFA, CAC, MOCA, or SS from January 2012 to June 2023. The clinical outcomes, including postoperative complications and the Aberdeen Varicose Vein Questionnaire score, were assessed.
resultsDuring the study period, 2866 patients with varicose veins were treated. Among them, 1670 patients (57.9%) were women. The mean age was 55.3 ± 12.9 years. RFA, CAC, MOCA, and SS were performed in 1984 (68.7%), 732 (25.4%), 78 (2.7%), and 88 (3.0%) patients, respectively. The complete target vein closure rate after RFA, CAC, and MOCA was 94.5%, 98%, and 98%, respectively. The absence of a target vein after SS was 98%. Deep vein thrombosis developed in four patients: one in the RFA group and three in CAC group. Surgical or endovenous procedure-induced thrombosis occurred in 2.3%, 4.8%, 6.4%, and 2.3% of the patients after RFA, CAC, MOCA, and SS, respectively. Phlebitis along the target vein occurred in 0.2% and 3.8% of patients after RFA and MOCA, respectively. A hypersensitivity reaction occurred in 3.7% of patients after CAC. Readmission was required for two patients who had undergone SS. Transient nerve symptoms developed in five (0.3%), zero, one (1.3%), and two (2.3%) patients after RFA, CAC, MOCA, and SS, respectively. After treatment, the Aberdeen Varicose Vein Questionnaire score improved significantly in all groups.
conclusionsThe clinical outcomes with improvement in quality of life were comparable among the different treatment modalities. The proximity of the nerve or skin to the target vein is the most important factor in selecting a suitable treatment modality.
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.