Efficacy and safety of radiofrequency ablation combined with high ligation vs simple radiofrequency ablation for lower extremity varicose veins: a retrospective comparative study.

IF 1.7 4区 医学 Q2 SURGERY
Videosurgery and Other Miniinvasive Techniques Pub Date : 2026-03-27 eCollection Date: 2026-03-31 DOI:10.20452/wiitm.2026.18017
Jianli Zhang, Xinyu Zhang, Rui Zhang
{"title":"Efficacy and safety of radiofrequency ablation combined with high ligation vs simple radiofrequency ablation for lower extremity varicose veins: a retrospective comparative study.","authors":"Jianli Zhang, Xinyu Zhang, Rui Zhang","doi":"10.20452/wiitm.2026.18017","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Simple radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is a standard minimally-invasive treatment for lower extremity varicose veins (LEVV), yet concerns regarding recurrence and efficacy in severe cases persist.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>We aimed to evaluate clinical efficacy, safety, and long-term prognosis of RFA combined with high ligation (RFHL) vs simple RFA.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This retrospective study analyzed 108 LEVV patients (from January 2020 to November 2024) divided into 2 groups based on the procedure they underwent: RFHL (n = 54) and RFA (n = 54). The comparisons included perioperative indicators, clinical efficacy, complications, and 1-year recurrence rates. A stratified analysis was performed for severe cases (Clinical-Etiology-Anatomy-Pathophysiology [CEAP] classification, C4-C6).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Perioperative metrics (operative time, blood loss, recovery, and pain intensity) showed no differences between the groups. However, RFHL achieved a significantly higher total effective rate than RFA. Notably, in severe cases (C4-C6), RFHL efficacy was superior. The RFHL group demonstrated markedly lower complication and 1-year recurrence rates. Additionally, 6-month venous function was considerably better in the RFHL group.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>RFHL is associated with comparable perioperative recovery to RFA but offers significantly higher efficacy, better safety, and lower long-term recurrence, especially in severe LEVV (CEAP, C4-C6). RFHL should be considered the preferred surgical approach for severe cases.</p>","PeriodicalId":49361,"journal":{"name":"Videosurgery and Other Miniinvasive Techniques","volume":"21 1","pages":"45-51"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2026-03-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13123266/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Videosurgery and Other Miniinvasive Techniques","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.20452/wiitm.2026.18017","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/3/31 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Simple radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is a standard minimally-invasive treatment for lower extremity varicose veins (LEVV), yet concerns regarding recurrence and efficacy in severe cases persist.

Aim: We aimed to evaluate clinical efficacy, safety, and long-term prognosis of RFA combined with high ligation (RFHL) vs simple RFA.

Materials and methods: This retrospective study analyzed 108 LEVV patients (from January 2020 to November 2024) divided into 2 groups based on the procedure they underwent: RFHL (n = 54) and RFA (n = 54). The comparisons included perioperative indicators, clinical efficacy, complications, and 1-year recurrence rates. A stratified analysis was performed for severe cases (Clinical-Etiology-Anatomy-Pathophysiology [CEAP] classification, C4-C6).

Results: Perioperative metrics (operative time, blood loss, recovery, and pain intensity) showed no differences between the groups. However, RFHL achieved a significantly higher total effective rate than RFA. Notably, in severe cases (C4-C6), RFHL efficacy was superior. The RFHL group demonstrated markedly lower complication and 1-year recurrence rates. Additionally, 6-month venous function was considerably better in the RFHL group.

Conclusions: RFHL is associated with comparable perioperative recovery to RFA but offers significantly higher efficacy, better safety, and lower long-term recurrence, especially in severe LEVV (CEAP, C4-C6). RFHL should be considered the preferred surgical approach for severe cases.

射频消融联合高位结扎与单纯射频消融治疗下肢静脉曲张的疗效和安全性:一项回顾性比较研究。
简介:简单射频消融(RFA)是下肢静脉曲张(LEVV)的标准微创治疗方法,但对严重病例的复发和疗效的担忧仍然存在。目的:我们旨在评估RFA联合高结扎(RFHL)与单纯RFA的临床疗效、安全性和长期预后。材料和方法:本回顾性研究分析了108例LEVV患者(2020年1月至2024年11月),根据其接受的手术分为两组:RFHL (n = 54)和RFA (n = 54)。比较包括围手术期指标、临床疗效、并发症、1年复发率。对重症病例进行分层分析(临床-病因学-解剖-病理生理学[CEAP]分类,C4-C6)。结果:围手术期指标(手术时间、出血量、恢复和疼痛强度)在两组间无差异。然而,RFHL的总有效率明显高于RFA。值得注意的是,在严重病例(C4-C6)中,RFHL的疗效更佳。RFHL组并发症和1年复发率明显降低。此外,RFHL组6个月静脉功能明显改善。结论:RFHL的围手术期恢复与RFA相当,但其疗效更高,安全性更好,长期复发率更低,特别是在严重的LEVV中(CEAP, C4-C6)。对于严重的病例,RFHL应被视为首选的手术方法。
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
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
23.50%
发文量
48
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques serves as a forum for exchange of multidisciplinary experiences in fields such as: surgery, gynaecology, urology, gastroenterology, neurosurgery, ENT surgery, cardiac surgery, anaesthesiology and radiology, as well as other branches of medicine dealing with miniinvasive techniques.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书