Suppr超能文献

轴向消融与反流源末端阻断(AAVTIRS):一项随机对照试验。

Axial Ablation versus Terminal Interruption of the Reflux Source (AAVTIRS): A Randomised Controlled Trial.

机构信息

National University of Ireland Galway, Galway, Ireland.

University Hospital Galway, Galway, Ireland.

出版信息

Vasc Endovascular Surg. 2024 Nov;58(8):805-812. doi: 10.1177/15385744241265750. Epub 2024 Jul 21.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

Treatment of reflux has been shown to improve time to healing of Venous Leg Ulcers (VLU). Terminal Interruption of the Reflux Source (TIRS) treats reflux within the plexus of veins around an active VLU using foam sclerotherapy. The efficacy of TIRS in managing VLU has never been tested.

METHODS

We performed a pragmatic, single centre, assessor-blinded, randomised controlled trial comparing endovenous ablation of the axial superficial veins (Axial Ablation-AA) vs TIRS. Patients of any age with VLU of any duration were eligible.

RESULTS

98 Participants were randomised to AA or TIRS. 39/55, 70.9% (95%CI; 57.1-82.37) healed their VLU in the AA group, while 29/39, 74.36% (95%CI; 57.87-86.96) healed their VLU in the TIRS group, = 0.45.4 were lost to follow-up. Median time to ulcer healing was 84 days (95%CI; 74.67-93.33) in the axial ablation group and 84 days (95%CI; 73.02-94.98) in the TIRS group. Hazard Ratio for ulcer healing with AA vs TIRS was 0.96 (95%CI 0.59-1.56). There were no significant quality of life differences.

CONCLUSION

The AAVTIRS trial did not show that axial ablation was superior to TIRS in the primary outcome of number of VLU healed in 6 months, or time to VLU healing. This trial is not powered to show non-inferiority. TIRS is a viable option for treatment of VLU. Further investigation is necessary before it can be recommended as an alternative to axial ablation.Trial registered at clinicaltrials.gov NCT04484168.

摘要

简介

已经证明,反流的治疗可以改善静脉溃疡(VLU)的愈合时间。终端反流源中断(TIRS)使用泡沫硬化疗法治疗活跃 VLU 周围静脉丛中的反流。TIRS 治疗 VLU 的疗效从未经过测试。

方法

我们进行了一项实用的、单中心、评估者盲法、随机对照试验,比较了静脉内消融轴向浅静脉(轴向消融-Axial Ablation-AA)与 TIRS。任何年龄、任何持续时间的 VLU 患者均符合条件。

结果

98 名参与者被随机分配到 AA 或 TIRS 组。AA 组中,39/55,70.9%(95%CI;57.1-82.37)的 VLU 愈合,而 TIRS 组中,29/39,74.36%(95%CI;57.87-86.96)的 VLU 愈合,=0.45。4 人失访。在轴向消融组中,溃疡愈合的中位数时间为 84 天(95%CI;74.67-93.33),在 TIRS 组中为 84 天(95%CI;73.02-94.98)。AA 与 TIRS 相比,溃疡愈合的危险比为 0.96(95%CI 0.59-1.56)。两组间生活质量无显著差异。

结论

AAVTIRS 试验并未表明在 6 个月内 VLU 愈合数量或 VLU 愈合时间这两个主要结局中,轴向消融优于 TIRS。本试验没有能力显示非劣效性。TIRS 是治疗 VLU 的可行选择。在推荐其作为轴向消融的替代方案之前,还需要进一步的研究。试验在 clinicaltrials.gov 注册,NCT04484168。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b24a/11425978/d19ceeb98c77/10.1177_15385744241265750-fig1.jpg

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