Suppr超能文献

与大隐静脉高位结扎剥脱术相比,腔内激光消融术后同部位复发更为常见:一项随机临床试验(RELACS研究)的5年结果

Same Site Recurrence is More Frequent After Endovenous Laser Ablation Compared with High Ligation and Stripping of the Great Saphenous Vein: 5 year Results of a Randomized Clinical Trial (RELACS Study).

作者信息

Rass K, Frings N, Glowacki P, Gräber S, Tilgen W, Vogt T

机构信息

Department of Dermatology, Venerology and Allergology, Saarland University Hospital, Homburg, Germany; Eifelklinik St. Brigida, Vein and Skin Centre, Simmerath, Germany.

Capio Mosel-Eifel-Klinik, Clinic for Vein Disorders, Bad Bertrich, Germany.

出版信息

Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2015 Nov;50(5):648-56. doi: 10.1016/j.ejvs.2015.07.020. Epub 2015 Aug 28.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To compare the long-term clinical efficacy of endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) with high ligation and stripping (HLS) as standard treatment for great saphenous vein (GSV) incompetence.

DESIGN

Investigator initiated two centre randomized controlled trial with 5 year follow up.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Interventions were performed on ambulatory and hospitalized patients at two vein centres, a university dermatology department (EVLA) and a specialized vein clinic (HLS). Four hundred patients suffering from GSV incompetence were assigned to EVLA or HLS of the GSV. One hundred and eighty five and 161 patients (=limbs), respectively, were treated per protocol. Main outcome measures were clinically recurrent varicose veins after surgery (REVAS classification, primary study objective), Duplex detected saphenofemoral recurrence, clinical venous severity scoring (Homburg Varicose Vein Severity Score), quality of life (Chronic Venous Insufficiency Questionnaire 2), side effects, and patient satisfaction 5 years after treatment.

RESULTS

Two hundred and eighty one legs (81% of the study population) were evaluated with a median follow up of 60.4 (EVLA) and 60.7 months (HLS). Overall, REVAS was similarly observed in both groups: 45% (EVLA) and 54% (HLS), p = .152. Patients of the EVLA group showed significantly more clinical recurrences in the operated region (REVAS: same site): 18% vs. 5%, p = .002. In contrast, more different site recurrences were observed in the HLS group: 50% vs. 31%, p = .002. Duplex detected saphenofemoral refluxes occurred more frequently after EVLA: 28% vs. 5%, p < .001. Both treatments improved disease severity and quality of life without any difference.

CONCLUSIONS

EVLA and HLS are comparably effective concerning overall REVAS, improvement of disease severity, and quality of life. In terms of same site clinical recurrence and saphenofemoral refluxes, HLS is superior to EVLA 5 years after treatment.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN18322872.

摘要

目的

比较大隐静脉功能不全的标准治疗方法——腔内激光消融术(EVLA)与高位结扎剥脱术(HLS)的长期临床疗效。

设计

研究者发起的一项为期5年随访的双中心随机对照试验。

材料与方法

在两个静脉中心对门诊和住院患者进行干预,一个是大学皮肤科(EVLA),另一个是专业静脉诊所(HLS)。400例大隐静脉功能不全患者被分配接受大隐静脉的EVLA或HLS治疗。按照方案分别治疗了185例和161例患者(=肢体)。主要结局指标为术后临床复发性静脉曲张(REVAS分类,主要研究目标)、双功超声检测到的股隐静脉复发、临床静脉严重程度评分(洪堡静脉曲张严重程度评分)、生活质量(慢性静脉功能不全问卷2)、副作用以及治疗后5年的患者满意度。

结果

对281条腿(占研究人群的81%)进行了评估,EVLA组的中位随访时间为60.4个月,HLS组为60.7个月。总体而言,两组的REVAS情况相似:EVLA组为45%,HLS组为54%,p = 0.152。EVLA组患者手术区域的临床复发(REVAS:同一部位)明显更多:18% 对5%,p = 0.002。相比之下,HLS组观察到更多不同部位的复发:50% 对31%,p = 0.002。EVLA术后双功超声检测到的股隐静脉反流更频繁:28% 对5%,p < 0.001。两种治疗方法均改善了疾病严重程度和生活质量,且无差异。

结论

在总体REVAS、疾病严重程度改善和生活质量方面,EVLA和HLS的效果相当。在同一部位临床复发和股隐静脉反流方面,治疗后5年HLS优于EVLA。

临床试验注册号

ISRCTN18322872。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验