Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41763540›Full record

SynthesisJournal of vascular surgery. Venous and lymphatic disorders2026

Comparison of polidocanol endovenous microfoam (Varithena) to physician-compounded foam in sclerotherapy treatment of truncal varicosities: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Runzhi Chen, Chien Lin Soh, Marwah Salih, Matthew Tan, Benedict Turner, Sarah Onida, Alun H Davies

Abstract readSystematic ReviewNetwork Meta-AnalysisComparative Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of vascular surgery. Venous and lymphatic disorders, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Runzhi ChenSection of Vascular Surgery, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Chien Lin SohSection of Vascular Surgery, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Marwah SalihSection of Vascular Surgery, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Matthew TanSection of Vascular Surgery, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK. Electronic address: matthew.tan13@imperial.ac.uk.
Benedict TurnerSection of Vascular Surgery, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Sarah OnidaSection of Vascular Surgery, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Alun H DaviesSection of Vascular Surgery, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCommercial premixed foam sclerosants such as Varithena, a polidocanol endovenous microfoam, have been developed and marketed as better alternatives to physician-compounded foams (PCFs). The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of Varithena compared with PCFs in foam sclerotherapy for the treatment of truncal varicose veins.

methodsA systematic review was performed according to PRISMA and Meta-Analysis guidelines with a registered protocol (PROSPERO: CRD42024494805) using Medline and EMBASE databases from inception to June 17, 2025, by two reviewers. Randomized controlled trials that reported on occlusion rates after truncal varicose vein treatment with foam sclerotherapy were included. A network meta-analysis was performed.

resultsSix randomized controlled trials with a total of 1726 patients were identified. Complete occlusion was defined as elimination of saphenofemoral junction reflux or occlusion of the saphenous vein on duplex imaging. The median follow-up was 39 weeks (range, 12-52 weeks). No significant difference was observed between Varithena and PCF with respect to occlusion rates at follow-up (risk ratio [RR], 1.12; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.93-1.35; I

conclusionsIn patients with saphenous varices, there was no indication that Varithena was superior to or associated with fewer complications than PCFs Further trials are required to define the role of Varithena in the treatment of varicose veins, especially within the context of less expensive alternatives.

Indexed as

PolidocanolSclerosing SolutionsSclerotherapyVaricose VeinsFemaleHumansMaleRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSaphenous VeinTreatment OutcomePolidocanolSclerosing SolutionsChronic venous diseaseFoam sclerotherapyPhysician-compounded foamPolidocanolVaricose veinsVarithena

Identifiers

PMID41763540
PMCPMC13022608

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.