ArticleFrontiers in medicine2026
Effect of different durations of compression therapy on quality of life and recurrence after thermal ablation for varicose veins: a protocol for a prospective, multicenter, randomized controlled trial.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Compression therapy is routinely recommended after the thermal ablation of varicose veins (VVs), but the optimal duration of treatment remains controversial. International guidelines acknowledge the lack of evidence to support a specific duration of compression therapy (grade 2C). In current clinical practice, the selection of therapy options (1-3 months or even longer) rely mainly on the clinical judgment of physicians, with significant variability in patient compliance and quality of life. This trial aims to determine the effects of different compression durations (1, 3, and 6 months) on recurrence, quality of life, and complications at 12 months after surgery. Methods: This will be a prospective, multicenter, randomized, parallel-group trial. This study will include 600 patients with great saphenous vein insufficiency (C2-C6) treated with endovenous radiofrequency or laser ablation at 7 high-volume centers. The participants will be randomly assigned to the following groups at a 1:1:1 ratio: the one-month (OM) group, which will wear class II compression stockings (23-32 mmHg) for 1 month after surgery; the three-month (TM) group, which will wear compression stockings for 3 months; and the six-month (SM) group, which will wear compression stockings for 6 months. All the groups will wear the same compression stockings and follow the same instructions for wearing the stockings. The primary outcome is the recurrence of VVs at 12 months; the secondary outcomes include the closure rate of the great saphenous vein, disease-specific quality of life assessed by the Aberdeen Varicose Vein Questionnaire (AVVQ), the Chronic Lower Limb Venous Insufficiency Questionnaire (CIVIQ) score, the Venous Clinical Severity Score (VCSS), the incidence of postoperative complications (pain, ecchymosis, paresthesia, deep vein thrombosis, etc.), and patient compliance. The follow-up times are 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery. Discussion: This trial fills a key gap in evidence concerning the optimal duration of compression therapy after endovenous thermal ablation and the effect of providing optimal compression therapy on recurrence. The results of this study will provide high-level evidence for a standardized duration of compression therapy and contribute to updated future clinical guidelines. Clinical trial registration: chictr.org.cn, identifier ChiCTR2100049550.
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.