Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41830487›Full record

Trial reportJournal der Deutschen Dermatologischen Gesellschaft = Journal of the German Society of Dermatology : JDDG2026

Same site recurrence following standardized high ligation and stripping of the great saphenous vein - 5-year results of the LaVaCro trial.

Thomas Hummel, Georgios Papapostolou, Margit Broermann, Christoph Dresler, Ingo Flessenkämper, Michael Jünger, Dietmar Stenger, Dominic Mühlberger, Yazad Sidhwa, Thomas Falkenstein and 2 more

Abstract readMulticenter StudyClinical Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal der Deutschen Dermatologischen Gesellschaft = Journal of the German Society of Dermatology : JDDG, 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

12 authors.

Thomas HummelInterdisciplinary vein center of the dermatological and vascular surgery clinics, Catholic Hospital of the Ruhr University Bochum, Bochum, Germany.
Georgios PapapostolouInterdisciplinary vein center of the dermatological and vascular surgery clinics, Catholic Hospital of the Ruhr University Bochum, Bochum, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2298-8270
Margit BroermannDepartment of Phlebology, Artemed Fachklinik, Munich, Germany.
Christoph DreslerVein Center Northeim, Northeim, Germany.
Ingo FlessenkämperDepartment of vascular surgery HELIOS Klinikum Emil von Behring, Berlin, Germany.
Michael JüngerDepartment of Dermatology, University Hospital Greifswald, Greifswald, Germany.
Dietmar StengerVein Center Saarlouis, Saarlouis, Germany.
Dominic MühlbergerInterdisciplinary vein center of the dermatological and vascular surgery clinics, Catholic Hospital of the Ruhr University Bochum, Bochum, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9636-5108
Yazad SidhwaInterdisciplinary vein center of the dermatological and vascular surgery clinics, Catholic Hospital of the Ruhr University Bochum, Bochum, Germany.
Thomas FalkensteinInterdisciplinary vein center of the dermatological and vascular surgery clinics, Catholic Hospital of the Ruhr University Bochum, Bochum, Germany.
Markus StückerInterdisciplinary vein center of the dermatological and vascular surgery clinics, Catholic Hospital of the Ruhr University Bochum, Bochum, Germany.
Achim MummeInterdisciplinary vein center of the dermatological and vascular surgery clinics, Catholic Hospital of the Ruhr University Bochum, Bochum, Germany.

Funding

vein surgery working group
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSame-site recurrence at the sapheno-femoral junction (SFJ) takes up a large amount of the daily practice of phlebologists. Follow-up data for high-ligation and stripping (HL/S) of the great saphenous vein (GSV) are quite heterogenous and incoherent. This prospective multicentric study was designed to elucidate the outcome after standardized HL/S with special focus on same site groin recurrences. PATIENTS AND

methodsA standardized HL/S of the GSV, including closure of the cribriform fascia, was performed. The primary endpoint was same-site groin recurrence, assessed by clinical examination and duplex ultrasonography. Secondary endpoints were recurrences at different sites.

results405 patients (519 legs) from six German vein centers were included. 225 patients (287 legs, 55.56%) were available for the five-year follow up examination. 21 legs (7.32%) suffered from clinically apparent varicosis. Same site groin recurrences were detected in five (1.74%) cases, of which only two were clinically relevant. Most clinically apparent varicose veins were caused by perforator insufficiencies.

conclusionsThe standardized technique of HL/S including ligation of small tributaries of the common femoral vein near the SFJ as well as the closure of the cribriform fascia as an anatomical barrier shows excellent results after five years.

Indexed as

Saphenous VeinVaricose VeinsVenous InsufficiencyAdultAgedFemaleGermanyHumansLigationLongitudinal StudiesMaleMiddle AgedRecurrenceTreatment OutcomeVascular Surgical ProceduresGreat saphenous veingroin recurrencehigh ligationsaphenofemoral junctionvaricose veins

Identifiers

PMID41830487
PMCPMC13636131

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.