Elsevier

Annals of Vascular Surgery

Volume 29, Issue 7, October 2015, Pages 1368-1372
Annals of Vascular Surgery

Clinical Research
A Comparison of 1,470-nm Endovenous Laser Ablation and Radiofrequency Ablation in the Treatment of Great Saphenous Veins 10 mm or More in Size

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avsg.2015.03.063Get rights and content

Background

To compare 1,470-nm endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) in the treatment of patients with great saphenous vein diameters of 10 mm or more.

Methods

One hundred twenty consecutive patients presenting to the cardiovascular surgery department with a great saphenous vein diameter exceeding 10 mm at the saphenofemoral junction between January and December 2013 were included in the study. The first randomly selected 60 patients (group 1) received 1,470-nm EVLA and the other 60 patients (group 2) received RFA. Patients were assessed on the second day, the first week, and the first, third, and sixth months. Major and minor complications were recorded.

Results

Minor complications in EVLA and RFA were hyperemia at 20% and 30% (P = 0.50), ecchymosis at 16.7% and 48.3% (P = 0.02), and edema at 40.0% and 65.5% (P < 0.08), respectively. No major complication was observed in any patient. Recanalization developed during monitoring in 3 patients in the RFA group, a rate of 5%. No recanalization was observed in the EVLA group. Success rates in the EVLA and RFA groups were 100% and 95%, respectively. Mean time to return to daily activity was 0.7 days in the EVLA group and 1.4 days in the RFA group (P < 0.006), whereas mean time to return to work was 1.8 days in the EVLA group and 2.2 days in the RFA group (P < 0.07). There was no statistically significant difference between the groups in terms of pain during the procedure or postoperatively. Less pain was reported in the EVLA during both (P < 0.02).

Conclusions

EVLA using a 1,470-nm radial fiber is superior to RFA in the treatment of saphenous veins larger than 10 mm in diameter.

Introduction

Lower extremity superficial venous insufficiency is a common disease that can progress to venous ulcers unless the clinical symptoms are treated.1 Primary treatment of varicose veins was surgery for many years, although thermal ablation techniques have become increasingly popular in recent years. Endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) are safe and minimally invasive techniques used in the treatment of saphenous vein insufficiency. Thermal endovenous ablation using an 810-nm diode laser was the first reported in 2001, by Navarro et al.2 Weiss et al.3 reported cases in which they performed thermal ablation using radiofrequency energy. EVLA and RFA produce similar histopathologic changes in the varicose saphenous vein.4 Damage in the venous wall associated with the heat energy emitted by the tip of the catheter occurs in both techniques, and venous structures are broken down. The vein thus assumes a fibrotic structure. However, although the results are similar, the mechanisms involved in the 2 techniques are different. When laser light is used, heat develops in the optic penetration zone with direct absorption of laser energy (radiation). This intraluminally emitted light energy is absorbed by various substances known as chromophores. These cause tissue damage through photochemical and photothermolytic mechanisms by reflecting this energy back to the tissues. In the radiofrequency technique, on the other hand, when the radiofrequency waves make contact with tissue by producing electromagnetic energy, this causes the collagen in connective tissue to break down by setting up vibration and abrasion. The most characteristic property of RFA is that it exhibits this effect at much lower temperatures (90–120°C) compared with other sources of energy. The radiofrequency catheter therefore has to be in direct contact with the tissue to produce effective thermal destruction. Because laser catheters are capable of reaching temperatures up to 700°C, they can cause perforation when they come into direct contact with tissue. There is therefore a prevailing opinion that because the radiofrequency catheter will not be able to make direct contact with the vein wall when the diameter of the saphenous vein exceeds 10 mm, its effectiveness may be quite low. The purpose of this study was to test that hypothesis by comparing 1470-nm EVLA and RFA in the treatment of superficial venous insufficiency in patients with a saphenous diameter of 10 mm or more in the saphenofemoral region.

Section snippets

Materials and Methods

One hundred twenty patients presenting to the cardiovascular surgery department between January and December 2013, and with a saphenous vein diameter of 10 mm or more at the level of the saphenofemoral joint (SFJ) were enrolled. Patients were randomly assigned into 1 of 2 groups after local ethical committee approval. Patients in group 1 received laser ablation and those in group 2 received RFA. Patients with a saphenous vein diameter less than 10 mm at the SFJ were excluded. Before the

Results

All patients had primary etiology, and pathophysiology in the entire extremity was associated with reflux. There was no statistical difference between extremities on the basis of CEAP and VCSS classifications at preoperative assessments. Mean duration of reflux in the SFJ was 3.7 sec in the EVLA group and 4.1 sec in the RFA group. EVLA and RFA procedures were performed on a total of 60 saphenous veins each. The mean diameter of the saphenous vein at the level of the SFJ was 11.3 mm and the mean

Discussion

The 2 most commonly used alternatives to surgery in the treatment of varicose veins in recent years are EVLA and endovenous RFA. Both methods involve similar mechanisms, are safe, effective, minimally invasive, and easy to perform with high occlusion rates in saphenous vein insufficiency. The absence of any requirement for general anesthesia or hospitalization, early mobilization, low complication and recurrence rates, and high patient satisfaction compared with surgery mean that EVLA and RFA

Cited by (29)

  • Non-randomized comparative study of three methods for great saphenous vein ablation associated with mini-phlebectomy; 48 months clinical and sonographic outcome

    2022, Annals of Medicine and Surgery
    Citation Excerpt :

    As the pain has not been the major complaint of the patients, therefore, they have been highly contempt with the immediate cosmetic results provided by the intraoperative phlebectomies done in the same session. While other studies have shown the superiority of EVLA over RFA after 6 months of follow-up [22,23]. Although most of these studies don't have the same follow-up period of 48 months as ours and have reported a shorter duration of follow-up, the number of the study population is close to ours with minor changes as economic problems in our locality make performing minimally invasive procedures by our teams more challenging.

  • Cost-effectiveness analysis of current varicose veins treatments

    2022, Journal of Vascular Surgery: Venous and Lymphatic Disorders
    Citation Excerpt :

    Fig 1 shows the PRISMA chart for study selection. Seventy publications met our inclusion criteria, of which 47 were unique, independent studies,18,24-69 (Supplementary Table I, online only). One article reported two RCTs.68

  • Correlation of body mass index with recanalization risk after endovenous thermal ablation

    2022, Journal of Vascular Surgery: Venous and Lymphatic Disorders
View all citing articles on Scopus

Conflict of Interest: The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.

View full text