Randomized clinical trial of endovenous laser ablation compared with conventional surgery for great saphenous varicose veins

British Journal of Surgery

Volumn 98, Issue 4, 2011, Pages 501-510

  Carradice, D ^a   Mekako, A I ^a   Mazari, F A K ^a   Samuel, N ^a   Hatfield, J ^a   Chetter, I C ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF HULL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANALGESIC AGENT;

ADULT; ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DISABLED PERSON; ENDOVASCULAR SURGERY; FEMALE; HUMAN; LOW LEVEL LASER THERAPY; MALE; METHODOLOGY; MIDDLE AGED; PATIENT SATISFACTION; POSTOPERATIVE PAIN; QUALITY ADJUSTED LIFE YEAR; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUESTIONNAIRE; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; SAPHENOUS VEIN; TREATMENT OUTCOME; VARICOSIS; VEIN INSUFFICIENCY;

ADULT; ANALGESICS; DISABLED PERSONS; ENDOVASCULAR PROCEDURES; FEMALE; HUMANS; LASER THERAPY; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PAIN, POSTOPERATIVE; PATIENT SATISFACTION; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUALITY-ADJUSTED LIFE YEARS; QUESTIONNAIRES; SAPHENOUS VEIN; TREATMENT OUTCOME; VARICOSE ULCER; VENOUS INSUFFICIENCY;

EID: 79951976647     PISSN: 00071323     EISSN: 13652168     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/bjs.7394     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. Callam MJ,. Epidemiology of varicose veins. Br J Surg 1994; 81: 167-173. (Pubitemid 24122340)
2. Kaplan RM, Criqui MH, Denenberg JO, Bergan J, Fronek A,. Quality of life in patients with chronic venous disease: San Diego population study. J Vasc Surg 2003; 37: 1047-1053. (Pubitemid 36538930)
3. Kurz X, Lamping DL, Kahn SR, Baccaglini U, Zuccarelli F, Spreafico G, et al., Do varicose veins affect quality of life? Results of an international population-based study. J Vasc Surg 2001; 34: 641-648. (Pubitemid 33664913)
4. Mackenzie RK, Paisley A, Allan PL, Lee AJ, Ruckley CV, Bradbury AW,. The effect of long saphenous vein stripping on quality of life. J Vasc Surg 2002; 35: 1197-1203. (Pubitemid 44718522)
5. Carradice D, Chetter I,. Endovenous laser ablation in the management of varicose veins. In Vascular and Endovascular Consensus Update, Greenhalgh RM, (ed.). BIBA: London, 2008; 581-584.
6. Hospital Health Statistics Online. [accessed 1 July 2010].
7. Edwards AG, Baynham S, Lees T, Mitchell DC,. Management of varicose veins: a survey of current practice by members of the Vascular Society of Great Britain and Ireland. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 2009; 91: 77-80.
8. Michaels JA, Campbell WB, Brazier JE, Macintyre JB, Palfreyman SJ, Ratcliffe J, et al., Randomised clinical trial, observational study and assessment of cost-effectiveness of the treatment of varicose veins (REACTIV trial). Health Technol Assess 2006; 10: 1-196, iii-iv.
9. Ware JE, Snow KK, Kosisnki M, Gandek B,. SF-36 Health Survey, Manual and Interpretation Guide. The Health Institute: Boston, 1993.
10. Mekako AI, Hatfield J, Bryce J, Lee D, McCollum PT, Chetter I,. A nonrandomised controlled trial of endovenous laser therapy and surgery in the treatment of varicose veins. Ann Vasc Surg 2006; 20: 451-457. (Pubitemid 44379322)
11. Mekako AI, Chetter IC, Coughlin PA, Hatfield J, McCollum PT, et al., Randomized clinical trial of co-amoxiclav versus no antibiotic prophylaxis in varicose vein surgery. Br J Surg 2010; 97: 29-36.
12. Brazier J, Roberts J, Deverill M,. The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-36. J Health Econ 2002; 21: 271-292. (Pubitemid 34143147)
13. Ara R, Brazier J,. Deriving an algorithm to convert the eight mean SF-36 dimension scores into a mean EQ-5D preference-based score from published studies (where patient level data are not available). Value Health 2008; 11: 1131-1143.
14. Drummond MF, Sculpher MJ, Torrance GW, O'Bien BJ, Stoddart GL,. Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes (3rd edn). Oxford Medical Publications: Oxford, 2005.
15. Mehrez A, Gafni A,. The healthy-years equivalents: how to measure them using the standard gamble approach. Med Decis Making 1991; 11: 140-146.
16. Gold MR, Siegel JE, Russell LB, Weinstein MC,. Cost-effectiveness in Health and Medicine. Oxford University Press: New York, 1996.
17. Dolan P, Gudex C, Kind P, Williams A,. The time trade-off method: results from a general population study. Health Economics 1996; 5: 141-154. (Pubitemid 126484860)
18. The EuroQol Group. EuroQola a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life. Health Policy 1990; 16: 199-208.
19. Brazier J, Jones N, Kind P,. Testing the validity of the Euroqol and comparing it with the SF-36 health survey questionnaire. Qual Life Res 1993; 2: 169-180. (Pubitemid 23203441)
20. Brooks R,. EuroQol: the current state of play. Health Policy 1996; 37: 53-72. (Pubitemid 26191458)
21. Garratt AM, MacDonald LM, Ruta DA, Russell IT, Buckingham JK, Krukowski ZH,. Towards measurement of outcome for patients with varicose veins. Qual Health Care 1993; 2: 5-10.
22. Garratt AM, Ruta DA, Abdalla MI, Buckingham JK, Russell IT,. The SF36 health survey questionnaire: an outcome measure suitable for routine use within the NHS? BMJ 1993; 306: 1440-1444. (Pubitemid 23154746)
23. Garratt AM, Ruta DA, Abdalla MI, Russell IT,. Responsiveness of the SF-36 and a condition-specific measure of health for patients with varicose veins. Qual Life Res 1996; 5: 223-234. (Pubitemid 26180670)
24. McHorney CA, Ware JE Jr, Raczek AE,. The MOS 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36): II. Psychometric and clinical tests of validity in measuring physical and mental health constructs. Med Care 1993; 31: 247-263.
25. McHorney CA, Ware JE Jr, Lu JF, Sherbourne CD,. The MOS 36-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36): III. Tests of data quality, scaling assumptions, and reliability across diverse patient groups. Med Care 1994; 32: 40-66.
26. Smith JJ, Garratt AM, Guest M, Greenhalgh RM, Davies AH,. Evaluating and improving health-related quality of life in patients with varicose veins. J Vasc Surg 1999; 30: 710-719.
27. Beebe HG, Bergan JJ, Bergqvist D, Eklof B, Eriksson I, Goldman MP, et al., Classification and grading of chronic venous disease in the lower limbs. A consensus statement. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 1996; 12: 487-491.
28. Eklöf B, Rutherford RB, Bergan JJ, Carpentier PH, Gloviczki P, Kistner RL, et al., Revision of the CEAP classification for chronic venous disorders: consensus statement. J Vasc Surg 2004; 40: 1248-1252. (Pubitemid 40037299)
29. Kakkos SK, Rivera MA, Matsagas MI, Lazarides MK, Robless P, Belcaro G, et al., Validation of the new venous severity scoring system in varicose vein surgery. J Vasc Surg 2003; 38: 224-228. (Pubitemid 41123245)
30. Rutherford RB, Padberg FT Jr, Comerota AJ, Kistner RL, Meissner MH, Moneta GL,. Venous severity scoring: an adjunct to venous outcome assessment. J Vasc Surg 2000; 31: 1307-1312. (Pubitemid 30418499)
31. Angst F, Aeschlimann A, Stucki G,. Smallest detectable and minimal clinically important differences of rehabilitation intervention with their implications for required sample sizes using WOMAC and SF-36 quality of life measurement instruments in patients with osteoarthritis of the lower extremities. Arthritis Rheum 2001; 45: 384-391. (Pubitemid 32738745)
32. Davies AH, Steffen C, Cosgrove C, Wilkins DC,. Varicose vein surgery: patient satisfaction. J R Coll Surg Edinb 1995; 40: 298-299.
33. Samsa G, Edelman D, Rothman ML, Williams GR, Lipscomb J, Matchar D,. Determining clinically important differences in health status measures: a general approach with illustration to the Health Utilities Index Mark II. Pharmacoeconomics 1999; 15: 141-155. (Pubitemid 29093257)
34. Walters SJ, Brazier JE,. What is the relationship between the minimally important difference and health state utility values? The case of the SF-6D. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2003; 1: 4.
35. Walters SJ, Brazier JE,. Comparison of the minimally important difference for two health state utility measures: EQ-5D and SF-6D. Qual Life Res 2005; 14: 1523-1532. (Pubitemid 40848233)
36. van den Bos RR, Neumann M, de Roos KP, Nijsten T,. Endovenous laser ablation-induced complications: review of the literature and new cases. Dermatol Surg 2009; 35: 1206-1214.
37. van den Bos R, Arends L, Kockaert M, Neumann M, Nijsten T,. Endovenous therapies of lower extremity varicosities: a meta-analysis. J Vasc Surg 2009; 49: 230-239.
38. Darvall KA, Bate GR, Adam DJ, Bradbury AW,. Recovery after ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy compared with conventional surgery for varicose veins. Br J Surg 2009; 96: 1262-1267.
39. Disselhoff BC, der Kinderen DJ, Kelder JC, Moll FL,. Randomized clinical trial comparing endovenous laser with cryostripping for great saphenous varicose veins. Br J Surg 2008; 95: 1232-1238.
40. Rasmussen LH, Bjoern L, Lawaetz M, Blemings A, Lawaetz B, Eklof B,. Randomized trial comparing endovenous laser ablation of the great saphenous vein with high ligation and stripping in patients with varicose veins: short-term results. J Vasc Surg 2007; 46: 308-315. (Pubitemid 47411486)
41. Subramonia S, Lees T,. Randomized clinical trial of radiofrequency ablation or conventional high ligation and stripping for great saphenous varicose veins. Br J Surg 2010; 97: 328-336.
42. Darwood RJ, Theivacumar N, Dellagrammaticas D, Mavor AI, Gough MJ,. Randomized clinical trial comparing endovenous laser ablation with surgery for the treatment of primary great saphenous varicose veins. Br J Surg 2008; 95: 294-301.
43. Kalteis M, Berger I, Messie-Werndl S, Pistrich R, Schimetta W, Pölz W, et al., High ligation combined with stripping and endovenous laser ablation of the great saphenous vein: early results of a randomized controlled study. J Vasc Surg 2008; 47: 822-829.
44. Darwood RJ, Walker N, Bracey M, Cowan AR, Thompson JF, Campbell WB,. Return to work, driving and other activities after varicose vein surgery is very variable and is influenced little by advice from specialists. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 2009; 38: 213-219.
45. Wright AP, Berridge DC, Scott DJ,. Return to work following varicose vein surgery: influence of type of operation, employment and social status. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 2006; 31: 553-557.
46. Menyhei G, Gyevnár Z, Aratõ E, Kelemen O, Kollár L,. Conventional stripping versus cryostripping: a prospective randomised trial to compare improvement in quality of life and complications. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 2008; 35: 218-223. (Pubitemid 351163080)
47. Carradice D, Mekako AI, Hatfield J, Chetter IC,. Randomized clinical trial of concomitant or sequential phlebectomy after endovenous laser therapy for varicose veins. Br J Surg 2009; 96: 369-375.
48. Johnson JA, Coons SJ,. Comparison of the EQ-5D and SF-12 in an adult US sample. Qual Life Res 1998; 7: 155-166. (Pubitemid 28097903)
49. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Guide to the Methods of Technology Appraisal. 2008; [accessed 1 July 2010].
50. Department of Health. Guidance on the Routine Collection of Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs). For the NHS in England 2009/10. [accessed 1 July 2010].