Endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) 980 nm versus 1470 nm and the impact of fiber type: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 2.1 4区 医学 Q3 ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL
Vangelis Bontinis, Alkis Bontinis, Argirios Giannopoulos, Vasiliki Manaki, Apostolos G Pitoulias, Angeliki Chorti, Vasileios Rafailidis, Kiriakos Ktenidis
{"title":"Endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) 980 nm versus 1470 nm and the impact of fiber type: a systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Vangelis Bontinis, Alkis Bontinis, Argirios Giannopoulos, Vasiliki Manaki, Apostolos G Pitoulias, Angeliki Chorti, Vasileios Rafailidis, Kiriakos Ktenidis","doi":"10.1007/s10103-024-04112-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>We sought to assess the efficacy and safety of endovenous laser ablation utilizing a 980 nm device versus a 1470 nm device in the treatment of lower limb venous insufficiency. We performed a systematic review adhering to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 statement. A research on PubMed, Scopus and Web of science for articles published by January 2024 was conducted. The primary endpoint was great saphenous vein (GSV) and truncal vein occlusion. Eleven studies encompassing 3061 patients and 3193 truncal veins, were included. The 1470 nm device demonstrated superior truncal vein and GSV occlusion outcomes compared to the 980 nm device at the early, one-year, and medium to long-term follow-up intervals. Odds ratios (OR) were 2.79(95%CI:1.31-5.94), 2.22(95%CI:1.21-4.07), and 2.02(95%CI:1.24-3.29) for truncal veins and 2.54(95%CI:1.119-5.41), 2.06(95%CI:1.07-3.95) and 2.04(95%CI:1.25-3.33) for GSV, across the respective intervals. While both devices demonstrated minimal, deep vein thrombosis (DVT), endovenous heat-induced thrombosis (EHIT) ≥ 2, and burn estimates, the 1470 nm device exhibited improved paresthesia, risk ratio (RR), 0.51(95%CI:0.34-0.77) and pain outcomes, standardized mean difference (SMD), -0.62(95%CI:-0.99to-0.25). Subgroup analysis displayed enhanced occlusion outcomes with the 1470 nm device for the six-month and one-year intervals, irrespective of fiber type. Radial fibers were associated with improved paresthesia outcomes (β=-0.9520,p = 0.03). This review emphasized the enhanced efficacy of the 1470 nm device over the 980 nm device, regardless of fiber type. Radial fibers showed promise for improved paresthesia outcomes, suggesting similar safety profiles for both systems. Conclusive remarks on pain outcomes were impeded by data limitations.</p>","PeriodicalId":17978,"journal":{"name":"Lasers in Medical Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Lasers in Medical Science","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10103-024-04112-0","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

We sought to assess the efficacy and safety of endovenous laser ablation utilizing a 980 nm device versus a 1470 nm device in the treatment of lower limb venous insufficiency. We performed a systematic review adhering to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 statement. A research on PubMed, Scopus and Web of science for articles published by January 2024 was conducted. The primary endpoint was great saphenous vein (GSV) and truncal vein occlusion. Eleven studies encompassing 3061 patients and 3193 truncal veins, were included. The 1470 nm device demonstrated superior truncal vein and GSV occlusion outcomes compared to the 980 nm device at the early, one-year, and medium to long-term follow-up intervals. Odds ratios (OR) were 2.79(95%CI:1.31-5.94), 2.22(95%CI:1.21-4.07), and 2.02(95%CI:1.24-3.29) for truncal veins and 2.54(95%CI:1.119-5.41), 2.06(95%CI:1.07-3.95) and 2.04(95%CI:1.25-3.33) for GSV, across the respective intervals. While both devices demonstrated minimal, deep vein thrombosis (DVT), endovenous heat-induced thrombosis (EHIT) ≥ 2, and burn estimates, the 1470 nm device exhibited improved paresthesia, risk ratio (RR), 0.51(95%CI:0.34-0.77) and pain outcomes, standardized mean difference (SMD), -0.62(95%CI:-0.99to-0.25). Subgroup analysis displayed enhanced occlusion outcomes with the 1470 nm device for the six-month and one-year intervals, irrespective of fiber type. Radial fibers were associated with improved paresthesia outcomes (β=-0.9520,p = 0.03). This review emphasized the enhanced efficacy of the 1470 nm device over the 980 nm device, regardless of fiber type. Radial fibers showed promise for improved paresthesia outcomes, suggesting similar safety profiles for both systems. Conclusive remarks on pain outcomes were impeded by data limitations.

Abstract Image

静脉腔内激光消融术(EVLA)980 纳米与 1470 纳米以及光纤类型的影响:系统综述与荟萃分析。
我们试图评估使用 980 nm 设备和 1470 nm 设备进行静脉腔内激光消融治疗下肢静脉功能不全的有效性和安全性。我们按照《系统综述和荟萃分析首选报告项目》(PRISMA)2020 声明进行了系统综述。我们在 PubMed、Scopus 和 Web of Science 上对 2024 年 1 月之前发表的文章进行了研究。主要终点是大隐静脉(GSV)和胫静脉闭塞。共纳入 11 项研究,包括 3061 名患者和 3193 条截断静脉。与 980 nm 设备相比,1470 nm 设备在早期、一年期和中长期随访中显示出更好的截干静脉和 GSV 闭塞效果。在相应的时间间隔内,截断静脉的比值比 (OR) 分别为 2.79(95%CI:1.31-5.94)、2.22(95%CI:1.21-4.07)和 2.02(95%CI:1.24-3.29),GSV 的比值比 (OR) 分别为 2.54(95%CI:1.119-5.41)、2.06(95%CI:1.07-3.95)和 2.04(95%CI:1.25-3.33)。虽然两种设备都显示出极小的深静脉血栓 (DVT)、静脉内热诱发血栓 (EHIT) ≥ 2 和烧伤估计值,但 1470 nm 设备显示出更好的麻痹性,风险比 (RR),0.51(95%CI:0.34-0.77) 和疼痛结果,标准化平均差 (SMD),-0.62(95%CI:-0.99-0.25)。亚组分析显示,无论纤维类型如何,1470 nm 设备都能在六个月和一年内提高闭塞效果。径向纤维与麻痹效果改善相关(β=-0.9520,p = 0.03)。这篇综述强调了 1470 nm 设备比 980 nm 设备的疗效更佳,无论光纤类型如何。径向纤维有望改善麻痹效果,这表明两种系统的安全性相似。由于数据的局限性,无法对疼痛结果做出定论。
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
Lasers in Medical Science
Lasers in Medical Science 医学-工程:生物医学
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
4.80%
发文量
192
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Lasers in Medical Science (LIMS) has established itself as the leading international journal in the rapidly expanding field of medical and dental applications of lasers and light. It provides a forum for the publication of papers on the technical, experimental, and clinical aspects of the use of medical lasers, including lasers in surgery, endoscopy, angioplasty, hyperthermia of tumors, and photodynamic therapy. In addition to medical laser applications, LIMS presents high-quality manuscripts on a wide range of dental topics, including aesthetic dentistry, endodontics, orthodontics, and prosthodontics. The journal publishes articles on the medical and dental applications of novel laser technologies, light delivery systems, sensors to monitor laser effects, basic laser-tissue interactions, and the modeling of laser-tissue interactions. Beyond laser applications, LIMS features articles relating to the use of non-laser light-tissue interactions.
×
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