Veneninsuffizienz: Laserablation und die Schlüsselrolle der Energieeinstellungen

Karger Kompass Pub Date : 2023-01-01 DOI:10.1159/000534330
Markus Stücker
{"title":"Veneninsuffizienz: Laserablation und die Schlüsselrolle der Energieeinstellungen","authors":"Markus Stücker","doi":"10.1159/000534330","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<b>Objective:</b> To date, conflicting evidence has been reported regarding the energy settings to use during endovenous laser ablation (EVLA). In the present study, we evaluated the outcomes of EVLA of the great saphenous veins (GSVs) using different power settings with the same linear endovenous energy density (LEED) of ∼70 J/cm. <b>Methods:</b> We performed a single-center, randomized, controlled noninferiority trial with a blinded outcome assessment of patients with varicose veins of the GSV who underwent EVLA with a wavelength of 1470 nm and a radial fiber. The patients were randomly assigned to three groups according to the energy setting: group 1, 5 W power and an automatic fiber traction speed of 0.7 mm/s (LEED, 71.4 J/cm); group 2, 7 W and 1.0 mm/s (LEED, 70 J/cm); and group 3, 10 W and 1.5 mm/s (LEED, 66.7 J/cm). The primary outcome was the rate of GSV occlusion at 6 months. The secondary outcomes were pain intensity along the target vein the next day and at 1 week and 2 months after EVLA, the necessity for analgesics, and the occurrence of significant complications. <b>Results:</b> From February 2017 to June 2020, 245 lower extremities of 203 patients were enrolled. Groups 1, 2, and 3 included 83, 79, and 83 limbs, respectively. At 6 months of follow-up, 214 lower extremities were examined with duplex ultrasound. GSV occlusion was observed in 72 of 72 limbs (100%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 100%-100%) in group 1 and 70 of 71 limbs (98.6%; 95% CI, 97%-100%) in groups 2 and 3 (P &amp;#x3c; .05 for noninferiority). No difference was found in the pain level, necessity for analgesics, or rate of any other complications.","PeriodicalId":477056,"journal":{"name":"Karger Kompass","volume":"84 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Karger Kompass","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000534330","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To date, conflicting evidence has been reported regarding the energy settings to use during endovenous laser ablation (EVLA). In the present study, we evaluated the outcomes of EVLA of the great saphenous veins (GSVs) using different power settings with the same linear endovenous energy density (LEED) of ∼70 J/cm. Methods: We performed a single-center, randomized, controlled noninferiority trial with a blinded outcome assessment of patients with varicose veins of the GSV who underwent EVLA with a wavelength of 1470 nm and a radial fiber. The patients were randomly assigned to three groups according to the energy setting: group 1, 5 W power and an automatic fiber traction speed of 0.7 mm/s (LEED, 71.4 J/cm); group 2, 7 W and 1.0 mm/s (LEED, 70 J/cm); and group 3, 10 W and 1.5 mm/s (LEED, 66.7 J/cm). The primary outcome was the rate of GSV occlusion at 6 months. The secondary outcomes were pain intensity along the target vein the next day and at 1 week and 2 months after EVLA, the necessity for analgesics, and the occurrence of significant complications. Results: From February 2017 to June 2020, 245 lower extremities of 203 patients were enrolled. Groups 1, 2, and 3 included 83, 79, and 83 limbs, respectively. At 6 months of follow-up, 214 lower extremities were examined with duplex ultrasound. GSV occlusion was observed in 72 of 72 limbs (100%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 100%-100%) in group 1 and 70 of 71 limbs (98.6%; 95% CI, 97%-100%) in groups 2 and 3 (P &#x3c; .05 for noninferiority). No difference was found in the pain level, necessity for analgesics, or rate of any other complications.
静脉功能功能:激光解和能量设置的关键作用
& lt; b>目的:& lt; / b>迄今为止,关于静脉内激光消融(EVLA)期间使用的能量设置,有相互矛盾的证据。在本研究中,我们在相同的线性静脉内能量密度(LEED)为~ 70 J/cm的情况下,评估了不同功率设置下大隐静脉(GSVs) EVLA的结果。& lt; b>方法:& lt; / b>我们进行了一项单中心,随机,对照非劣效性试验,对GSV静脉曲张患者进行了波长为1470 nm和径向纤维的EVLA,并进行了盲法结局评估。根据能量设置将患者随机分为3组:1组,功率为5 W,纤维自动牵引速度为0.7 mm/s (LEED, 71.4 J/cm);2、7 W和1.0 mm/s组(LEED, 70 J/cm);3组、10 W、1.5 mm/s (LEED, 66.7 J/cm)。主要结果是6个月时GSV闭塞率。次要结果为EVLA后第二天、1周和2个月时靶静脉疼痛强度、是否需要使用镇痛药以及明显并发症的发生。& lt; b>结果:& lt; / b>2017年2月至2020年6月,纳入203例患者的245条下肢。组1、组2、组3分别有83只、79只、83只肢体。随访6个月,214例患者接受双工超声检查。72个肢体中有72个出现GSV闭塞(100%;95%可信区间[CI], 100% ~ 100%), 71个肢体中,第1组和第70组(98.6%;95% CI, 97%-100%) (P <0.05为非劣效性)。在疼痛程度、镇痛药物的必要性或任何其他并发症的发生率方面没有发现差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信