Rasmussen Lars H, Bjoern Lars, Lawaetz Martin, Blemings Allan, Lawaetz Birgit, Eklof Bo
Danish Vein Centre, Naestved, Denmark.
J Vasc Surg. 2007 Aug;46(2):308-15. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2007.03.053. Epub 2007 Jun 27.
Endovenous laser (EVL) ablation of the great saphenous vein (GSV) is thought to minimize postoperative morbidity and reduce work loss compared with high ligation and stripping (HL/S). However, the procedures have not previously been compared in a randomized trial with parallel groups where both treatments were performed in tumescent anesthesia on an out-patient basis.
Patients with varicose veins due to GSV insufficiency were randomized to either EVL (980 nm) or HL/S in tumescent anesthesia. Miniphlebectomies were also performed. Patients were examined preoperatively and at 12 days, and 1, 3, and 6 months postoperatively. Sick leave, time to normal physical activity, pain score, use of analgesics, Aberdeen score, Medical Outcomes Study Short Form-36 quality-of-life score, Venous Clinical Severity Score (VCSS), and complication rates were investigated. The total cost of the procedures, including lost wages and equipment, was calculated. Cost calculations were based on the standard fee for HL/S with the addition of laser equipment and the standard salary and productivity level in Denmark.
A follow-up of 6 months was achieved in 121 patients (137 legs). The groups were well matched for patient and GSV characteristics. Two HL/S procedures failed, and three GSVs recanalized in the EVL group. The groups experienced similar improvement in quality-of-life scores and VCSS score at 3 months. Only one patient in the HL/S group had a major complication, a wound infection that was treated successfully with antibiotics. The HL/S and EVL groups did not differ in mean time to resume normal physical activity (7.7 vs 6.9 calendar days) and work (7.6 vs 7.0 calendar days). Postoperative pain and bruising was higher in the HL/S group, but no difference in the use of analgesics was recorded. The total cost of the procedures, including lost wages, was euro 3084 ($3948 US) in the HL/S and euro 3396 ($4347 US) in the EVL group.
This study suggests that the short-term efficacy and safety of EVL and HL/S are similar. Except for slightly increased postoperative pain and bruising in the HL/S group, no differences were found between the two treatment modalities. The treatments were equally safe and efficient in eliminating GSV reflux, alleviating symptoms and signs of GSV varicosities, and improving quality of life. Long-term outcomes, particularly with respect to recurrence rates, shall be investigated in future studies, including the continuation of the present.
与高位结扎剥脱术(HL/S)相比,大隐静脉(GSV)腔内激光(EVL)消融术被认为可将术后发病率降至最低,并减少工作损失。然而,此前尚未在随机平行组试验中对这两种手术进行比较,该试验中两种治疗均在门诊进行肿胀麻醉。
因GSV功能不全导致静脉曲张的患者被随机分为EVL(980nm)组或HL/S组,进行肿胀麻醉。同时也进行了小静脉切除术。在术前、术后12天、1个月、3个月和6个月对患者进行检查。调查病假、恢复正常体力活动的时间、疼痛评分、镇痛药使用情况、阿伯丁评分、医学结局研究简明健康调查36项生活质量评分、静脉临床严重程度评分(VCSS)和并发症发生率。计算手术的总成本,包括工资损失和设备费用。成本计算基于HL/S的标准费用,加上激光设备费用以及丹麦的标准工资和生产率水平。
121例患者(137条腿)完成了6个月的随访。两组患者和GSV特征匹配良好。HL/S组有2例手术失败,EVL组有3条GSV再通。两组在3个月时生活质量评分和VCSS评分的改善情况相似。HL/S组只有1例患者出现严重并发症,即伤口感染,经抗生素治疗成功。HL/S组和EVL组恢复正常体力活动的平均时间(7.7天对6.9天)和恢复工作的平均时间(7.6天对7.0天)没有差异。HL/S组术后疼痛和瘀伤更严重,但镇痛药使用情况无差异。包括工资损失在内,HL/S组手术总成本为3084欧元(4347美元),EVL组为3396欧元(4347美元)。
本研究表明,EVL和HL/S的短期疗效和安全性相似。除HL/S组术后疼痛和瘀伤略有增加外,两种治疗方式之间未发现差异。两种治疗在消除GSV反流、缓解GSV静脉曲张的症状和体征以及改善生活质量方面同样安全有效。未来的研究,包括本研究的后续研究,应调查长期结局,特别是复发率。