Endoluminal thermal ablation of the great saphenous vein (GSV) insufficiency

Sporbert, F.; Zollmann, Christine; Zollmann, Philipp; Veltman, J.; Graser, A; Berger, I.; Rabe, Eberhard

doi:10.12687/phleb2336-6-2016

Cited by 7 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Large-scale studies to evaluate the long-term effects of endovenous procedures are still lacking. A 2016 study comparing EVLA with RFA gave similarly good outcomes for the two procedures, although RFA resulted in slightly less postoperative pain [10]. A meta-analysis published by Hamann showed results that were comparable for high saphenous ligation and stripping as well as for the endovenous procedures, which, however, included only EVLA and RFA [11].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…Große Studien zur Beurteilung der Langzeitwirkung der endovenösen Verfahren fehlen immer noch. Eine Vergleichsstudie von EVLA und RFA zeigte 2016 vergleichbar gute Ergebnisse der beiden Verfahren, wobei die RFA eine leicht niedrigere Schmerzrate postoperativ zeigte [10]. Eine publizierte Metaanalyse von Hamann zeigte vergleichbare Ergebnisse von Krossektomie und Stripping sowie den endovenösen Verfahren, die jedoch auch hier nur EVLA und RFA einbezogen [11].…”

Section: Introductionunclassified

See 1 more Smart Citation

Rezidivraten und Form des Rezidivs nach endoluminaler Ablation der Vena saphena magna – Ein Vergleich von Laserablation (EVLA) 1470 nm, Radiofrequenz (RFITT und ClosureFast) sowie Heißdampf mit einer durchschnittlichen Nachbeobachtungszeit von 3,8 Jahren

Schuler¹,

Weingard²,

Kiderlen³

et al. 2020

Phlebologie

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives In addition to combined crossectomy and stripping or pure sclerotherapy, various endovenous thermal procedures are now available for treatment, which are compared in the present study. Methods Between 2009 and 2013, the GSV was ablated in 297 patients using one of four methods: EVLA 1470 nm, ClosureFast, RFITT or superheated steam. The recurrence rate after treatment was defined as the primary endpoint. Follow-up examinations with duplex ultrasound took place 14 days, 3 months and 1 year post-operatively, and thereafter annually with average follow-up time of 3.8 years and a follow-up rate of 81 %. Results At the time of the last follow-up examination, the following complete closure rates of treated GSV were found: ClosureFast 95 %, EVLA 97 %, RFITT 79 % and superheated steam 71 %. Serious complications occurred only with superheated steam (necrosis at the puncture site). The median pain intensity recorded 14 days post-operatively was 1–3 on a scale of 1–10. Both the CIVIQ score and the VCSS were significantly improved by all endovenous thermal methods. In 5–12 % of cases, reflux was found in the previously non-refluxive AASV. Conclusions EVLA and ClosureFast are indicated for the treatment of GSV incompetence with high success rates, comparable to the results with crossectomy and stripping. The RFITT and superheated steam methods present significantly lower closure rates. Particular attention should be paid to the presence of an initially non-refluxive AASV. Since there was an increased recurrence rate over this vein, it seems reasonable to treat the AASV primarily.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Section: Introductionunclassified

Rezidivraten und Form des Rezidivs nach endoluminaler Ablation der Vena saphena magna – Ein Vergleich von Laserablation (EVLA) 1470 nm, Radiofrequenz (RFITT und ClosureFast) sowie Heißdampf mit einer durchschnittlichen Nachbeobachtungszeit von 3,8 Jahren

Schuler¹,

Weingard²,

Kiderlen³

et al. 2020

Phlebologie

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

S2k guidelines: diagnosis and treatment of varicose veins

Pannier¹,

Noppeney²,

Alm³

et al. 2022

Hautarzt

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Table 1 Clinical classification (C) according to CEAP Class Clinical signs C0 No visible or palpable signs of venous incompetence C1 Spider veins and/or reticular varices C2 Varicose veins C3 Oedema C4a Pigmentation, eczema C4b Atrophie blanche, dermatoliposclerosis C5 Cured venous leg ulcer C6 Active venous leg ulcer in CEAP stage C2, developed progression to CVI [13]. Recommendation 13 An imaging technique shall be used in the context of standardised phlebological diagnosis. The first-choice method shall be duplex ultrasound. If necessary, vein function shall also be measured (e.g., PPG/LRR or VOP). Recommendation 15 Complete, traceable documentation of the findings shall be kept. Recommendation 16 Pathological findings from technical examinations should be tested for clinical significance. Recommendation 139 Invasive treatment of varicose veins during pregnancy should be indicated only in exceptional cases.

show abstract

Die nicht thermische und nicht tumeszente Behandlung der Stammveneninsuffizienz – Frühergebnisse mit IFU-konformer und modifizierter Anwendung des VenaSeal™-Closure-Verfahrens

Brandl

2022

Gefässchirurgie

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Endoluminal thermal ablation of the great saphenous vein (GSV) insufficiency

Cited by 7 publications

References 17 publications

Rezidivraten und Form des Rezidivs nach endoluminaler Ablation der Vena saphena magna – Ein Vergleich von Laserablation (EVLA) 1470 nm, Radiofrequenz (RFITT und ClosureFast) sowie Heißdampf mit einer durchschnittlichen Nachbeobachtungszeit von 3,8 Jahren

Rezidivraten und Form des Rezidivs nach endoluminaler Ablation der Vena saphena magna – Ein Vergleich von Laserablation (EVLA) 1470 nm, Radiofrequenz (RFITT und ClosureFast) sowie Heißdampf mit einer durchschnittlichen Nachbeobachtungszeit von 3,8 Jahren

S2k guidelines: diagnosis and treatment of varicose veins

Die nicht thermische und nicht tumeszente Behandlung der Stammveneninsuffizienz – Frühergebnisse mit IFU-konformer und modifizierter Anwendung des VenaSeal™-Closure-Verfahrens

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About