Thomas G Poder1, Jean-François Fisette1, Suzanne K Bédard1, Marc-Antoine Despatis1. 1. From the Unité d'évaluation des technologies et des modes d'intervention en santé (UETMIS) and the Centre de recherche du Centre hospitalier universitaire de Sherbrooke (CRCHUS), Centre intégré universitaire de santé et de services sociaux (CIUSSS) de l'Estrie - Centre hospitalier universitaire de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, Que. (Poder); the Faculté de médecine et des sciences de la santé, Université de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, Que. (Fisette); CRCHUS, CIUSSS de l'Estrie - Centre hospitalier universitaire de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, Que. (Bédard); and the Vascular Surgery Unit, CIUSSS de l'Estrie - Centre hospitalier universitaire de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, Que. (Despatis).
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Since the 1990s, new techniques for the treatment of varicose veins have emerged, including radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and laser treatment. We performed a study to compare the safety, efficacy and outcomes of RFA compared to those of open surgery and laser ablation for the treatment of varicose veins. We also carried out a cost analysis of RFA compared to open surgery to assess whether RFA could help free up operating room time by being performed in an outpatient context. METHODS: We conducted a systematic literature review (publication date May 2010-September 2013 for articles in English, January 1991-September 2013 for those in French). We used several checklists to measure the quality of the studies. We also collected data on costing. RESULTS: The literature search identified 924 publications, of which 38 were retained for analysis: 15 literature reviews, 1 good-practice guideline and 22 new primary studies. The overall level of evidence was low to moderate owing to the limited sample sizes, lack of information on patient characteristics and lack of standardization of the outcome measures. However, the results obtained are consistent from study to study. In the short and medium term, RFA is considered as effective as open surgery or laser treatment (moderate level of evidence) and presents fewer major and minor complications than open surgery (low level of evidence). Radiofrequency ablation can be performed on an outpatient basis. We calculated that RFA would be about $110-$220 more expensive per patient than open surgery. CONCLUSION: Radiofrequency ablation is a valuable alternative to open surgery and would free up operating room time in a context of low accessibility.
BACKGROUND: Since the 1990s, new techniques for the treatment of varicose veins have emerged, including radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and laser treatment. We performed a study to compare the safety, efficacy and outcomes of RFA compared to those of open surgery and laser ablation for the treatment of varicose veins. We also carried out a cost analysis of RFA compared to open surgery to assess whether RFA could help free up operating room time by being performed in an outpatient context. METHODS: We conducted a systematic literature review (publication date May 2010-September 2013 for articles in English, January 1991-September 2013 for those in French). We used several checklists to measure the quality of the studies. We also collected data on costing. RESULTS: The literature search identified 924 publications, of which 38 were retained for analysis: 15 literature reviews, 1 good-practice guideline and 22 new primary studies. The overall level of evidence was low to moderate owing to the limited sample sizes, lack of information on patient characteristics and lack of standardization of the outcome measures. However, the results obtained are consistent from study to study. In the short and medium term, RFA is considered as effective as open surgery or laser treatment (moderate level of evidence) and presents fewer major and minor complications than open surgery (low level of evidence). Radiofrequency ablation can be performed on an outpatient basis. We calculated that RFA would be about $110-$220 more expensive per patient than open surgery. CONCLUSION: Radiofrequency ablation is a valuable alternative to open surgery and would free up operating room time in a context of low accessibility.
Authors: Thomas M Proebstle; Jens Alm; Oliver Göckeritz; Christian Wenzel; Thomas Noppeney; Christian Lebard; Olivier Pichot; Carmine Sessa; Denis Creton Journal: J Vasc Surg Date: 2011-03-24 Impact factor: 4.268
Authors: F Pannier; T Noppeney; J Alm; F X Breu; G Bruning; I Flessenkämper; H Gerlach; K Hartmann; B Kahle; H Kluess; E Mendoza; D Mühlberger; A Mumme; H Nüllen; K Rass; S Reich-Schupke; D Stenger; M Stücker; C G Schmedt; T Schwarz; J Tesmann; J Teßarek; S Werth; E Valesky Journal: Hautarzt Date: 2022-04-19 Impact factor: 1.198
Authors: Philippe Quehe; Zarrin Alavi; Tatiana Kurylo-Touz; Anne-Helene Saliou; Ali Badra; Laurent Baudino; Gurven Gladu; Frederik Ledan; Raphaël Haudebourg; Simon Gestin; Luc Bressollette Journal: SAGE Open Med Date: 2018-08-21