• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

大隐静脉腔内激光消融术与高位结扎剥脱术治疗静脉曲张患者的随机对照试验:短期结果

Randomized trial comparing endovenous laser ablation of the great saphenous vein with high ligation and stripping in patients with varicose veins: short-term results.

作者信息

Rasmussen Lars H, Bjoern Lars, Lawaetz Martin, Blemings Allan, Lawaetz Birgit, Eklof Bo

机构信息

Danish Vein Centre, Naestved, Denmark.

出版信息

J Vasc Surg. 2007 Aug;46(2):308-15. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2007.03.053. Epub 2007 Jun 27.

DOI:10.1016/j.jvs.2007.03.053
PMID:17600655
Abstract

BACKGROUND

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.

METHODS

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.

RESULTS

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.

CONCLUSIONS

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.

摘要

背景

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。

方法

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。

结果

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)。

结论

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。

相似文献

1
Randomized trial comparing endovenous laser ablation of the great saphenous vein with high ligation and stripping in patients with varicose veins: short-term results.大隐静脉腔内激光消融术与高位结扎剥脱术治疗静脉曲张患者的随机对照试验:短期结果
J Vasc Surg. 2007 Aug;46(2):308-15. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2007.03.053. Epub 2007 Jun 27.
2
Prospective randomized trial comparing endovenous laser ablation and surgery for treatment of primary great saphenous varicose veins with a 2-year follow-up.前瞻性随机临床试验比较静脉腔内激光消融术与手术治疗原发性大隐静脉曲张的疗效:2 年随访。
J Vasc Surg. 2010 Nov;52(5):1234-41. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2010.06.104.
3
A randomized, controlled trial of endovenous thermal ablation using the 810-nm wavelength laser and the ClosurePLUS radiofrequency ablation methods for superficial venous insufficiency of the great saphenous vein.810nm 波长激光联合 ClosurePLUS 射频闭合术治疗大隐静脉曲张的随机对照临床试验。
J Vasc Surg. 2010 Sep;52(3):645-50. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2010.04.030. Epub 2010 Jul 17.
4
Five-year follow-up of a randomized, controlled trial comparing saphenofemoral ligation and stripping of the great saphenous vein with endovenous laser ablation (980 nm) using local tumescent anesthesia.一项随机对照试验的五年随访,该试验比较了大隐静脉高位结扎剥脱术与使用局部肿胀麻醉的静脉内激光消融术(980纳米)。
J Vasc Surg. 2016 Feb;63(2):420-8. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2015.08.084. Epub 2015 Oct 23.
5
Randomized clinical trial comparing endovenous laser ablation and stripping of the great saphenous vein with clinical and duplex outcome after 5 years.随机对照临床试验比较静脉内激光消融与大隐静脉剥脱术治疗大隐静脉曲张的临床和双功能超声随访 5 年结果。
J Vasc Surg. 2013 Aug;58(2):421-6. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2012.12.048. Epub 2013 Jun 12.
6
Ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy of the great saphenous vein with sapheno-femoral ligation compared to standard stripping: a prospective clinical study.与标准剥脱术相比,超声引导下大隐静脉泡沫硬化疗法联合大隐静脉-股静脉结扎术:一项前瞻性临床研究。
Int Angiol. 2011 Aug;30(4):321-6.
7
Endovenous laser ablation with and without high ligation compared with high ligation and stripping in the treatment of great saphenous varicose veins: initial results of a multicentre randomized controlled trial.大隐静脉曲张治疗中,静脉内激光消融联合或不联合高位结扎与高位结扎剥脱术的比较:一项多中心随机对照试验的初步结果
Phlebology. 2013 Feb;28(1):16-23. doi: 10.1258/phleb.2011.011147. Epub 2012 Mar 26.
8
Editor's Choice - Short Term Cost Effectiveness of Radiofrequency Ablation and High Ligation and Stripping for Great Saphenous Vein Incompetence.编辑精选 - 射频消融联合高位结扎剥脱术治疗大隐静脉曲张的短期成本效益分析。
Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2024 May;67(5):811-817. doi: 10.1016/j.ejvs.2024.01.085. Epub 2024 Feb 2.
9
Randomised clinical trial comparing endovenous laser ablation with stripping of the great saphenous vein: clinical outcome and recurrence after 2 years.随机对照临床试验比较静脉内激光消融与大隐静脉剥脱术:2 年后的临床结果和复发情况。
Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2010 May;39(5):630-5. doi: 10.1016/j.ejvs.2009.11.040. Epub 2010 Jan 12.
10
High ligation combined with stripping and endovenous laser ablation of the great saphenous vein: early results of a randomized controlled study.大隐静脉高位结扎联合剥脱术与腔内激光消融术:一项随机对照研究的早期结果
J Vasc Surg. 2008 Apr;47(4):822-9; discussion 829. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2007.10.060. Epub 2008 Mar 4.

引用本文的文献

1
Disparities in access to endovenous treatment options in chronic lower extremity superficial venous insufficiency: A national 7-year analysis.慢性下肢浅静脉功能不全患者静脉内治疗选择机会的差异:一项全国 7 年分析。
J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord. 2024 Jul;12(4):101867. doi: 10.1016/j.jvsv.2024.101867. Epub 2024 Mar 5.
2
A state-of-the-art review of quality-of-life assessment in venous disease.静脉疾病生活质量评估的最新研究综述。
J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord. 2024 Jul;12(4):101725. doi: 10.1016/j.jvsv.2023.101725. Epub 2023 Dec 19.
3
Endovenous laser ablation versus conventional surgery (ligation and stripping) for primary great saphenous varicose vein: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
原发性大隐静脉曲张的腔内激光消融术与传统手术(结扎和剥脱术)的系统评价和荟萃分析
Ann Med Surg (Lond). 2023 Jul 25;85(9):4509-4519. doi: 10.1097/MS9.0000000000001095. eCollection 2023 Sep.
4
The Effect of Body Mass Index on Outcome Following Ambulatory High Ligation and Stripping for Lower Varicose Veins: A Prospective Cohort Study.体重指数对门诊高位结扎剥脱术治疗下肢静脉曲张疗效的影响:一项前瞻性队列研究。
Front Surg. 2022 Apr 4;9:801729. doi: 10.3389/fsurg.2022.801729. eCollection 2022.
5
S2k guidelines: diagnosis and treatment of varicose veins.S2k指南:静脉曲张的诊断与治疗
Hautarzt. 2022 May;73(Suppl 1):1-44. doi: 10.1007/s00105-022-04977-8. Epub 2022 Apr 19.
6
Supplement of Clinical Practice Guidelines for Endovenous Thermal Ablation for Varicose Veins: Overuse for the Inappropriate Indication.《下肢静脉曲张腔内热消融治疗临床实践指南补充:不恰当适应证的过度使用》
Ann Vasc Dis. 2021 Dec 25;14(4):323-327. doi: 10.3400/avd.ra.21-00006.
7
Interventions for great saphenous vein incompetence.大隐静脉功能不全的治疗方法。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021 Aug 11;8(8):CD005624. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD005624.pub4.
8
Comparing the Success Rate and Side Effects of Endovenous Laser Ablation and Radiofrequency Ablation to Treat Varicose Veins in the Lower Limbs: A Randomized Clinical Trial.比较下肢静脉曲张腔内激光消融术和射频消融术的成功率及副作用:一项随机临床试验
J Lasers Med Sci. 2020 Fall;11(Suppl 1):S43-S48. doi: 10.34172/jlms.2020.S7. Epub 2020 Dec 30.
9
Interventions for great saphenous vein reflux: network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.大隐静脉反流的干预措施:随机临床试验的网络荟萃分析。
Br J Surg. 2021 Apr 5;108(3):244-255. doi: 10.1093/bjs/znaa101.
10
Endovenous Laser Ablation Combined with Stripping Technique for Large Saphenous Varicose Veins: The Selection of Operation Technique.腔内激光消融联合剥脱术治疗大隐静脉曲张:手术技术的选择
Ann Vasc Dis. 2019 Dec 25;12(4):514-518. doi: 10.3400/avd.oa.18-00169.