Eight‐year follow‐up of a randomized clinical trial comparing ultrasound‐guided foam sclerotherapy with surgical stripping of the great saphenous vein. BJS 2018; 105: 692-698.
Published: 13th April 2018
Authors: Y. L. Lam, J. A. Lawson, I. M. Toonder, N. H. Shadid, A. Sommer, M. Veenstra et al.
This was an 8‐year follow‐up of an RCT comparing ultrasound‐guided foam sclerotherapy (UGFS) with high ligation and surgical stripping (HL/S) of the great saphenous vein (GSV).
Patients were randomized to UGFS or HL/S of the GSV. The primary outcome was the recurrence of symptomatic GSV reflux. Secondary outcomes were patterns of reflux according to recurrent varices after surgery, Clinical Etiologic Anatomic Pathophysiologic (CEAP) classification, Venous Clinical Severity Score (VCSS) and EuroQol Five Dimensions (EQ‐5D™) quality‐of‐life scores.
Of 430 patients originally randomized (230 UGFS, 200 HL/S), 227 (52·8 per cent; 123 UGFS, 103 HL/S) were available for analysis after 8 years. The proportion of patients free from symptomatic GSV reflux at 8 years was lower after UGFS than HL/S (55·1
Surgical stripping had a technically better outcome in terms of recurrence of GSV and SFJ reflux than UGFS in the long term. Long‐term follow‐up suggests significant clinical progression of venous disease measured by VCSS in both groups, but less after surgery. Registration number: NCT02304146 (
You may also be interested in
Population‐based study of mortality and major amputation following lower limb revascularization. BJS 2018; 105: 1145-1154.
Authors: K. Heikkila, I. M. Loftus, D. C. Mitchell, A. S. Johal, S. Waton, D. A. Cromwell et al.
Notes: lower than previously estimated
Cost‐effectiveness of population‐based vascular disease screening and intervention in men from the Viborg Vascular (VIVA) trial.
Authors: R. Søgaard, J. S. Lindholt
Notes: Highly cost effective
Five‐year follow‐up of a randomized clinical trial comparing open surgery, foam sclerotherapy and endovenous laser ablation for great saphenous varicose veins. BJS 2018; 105: 686-691.
Authors: S. Vähäaho, K. Halmesmäki, A. Albäck, E. Saarinen, M. Venermo
Notes: More foam recurrences
Value of risk scores in the decision to palliate patients with ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm. BJS 2018; 105: 1135-1144.
Authors: M. J. Sweeting, P. Ulug, J. Roy, R. Hultgren, R. Indrakusuma, R. Balm et al.
Notes: Not much help
Follow‐up after endovascular aortic aneurysm repair can be stratified based on first postoperative imaging. BJS 2018; 105: 709-718.
Authors: H. Baderkhan, O. Haller, A. Wanhainen, M. Björck, K. Mani
Notes: Short sealing zones spell trouble
Risk of major amputation in patients with intermittent claudication undergoing early revascularization. BJS 2018; 105: 699-708.
Authors: J. Golledge, J. V. Moxon, S. Rowbotham, J. Pinchbeck, L. Yip, R. Velu et al.
Notes: Early revascularization associated with amputation
Authors: R. E. Clough, R. Spear, K. Van Calster, A. Hertault, R. Azzaoui, J. Sobocinski et al.
Notes: Encouraging results in expert hands
Authors: N. Rudarakanchana, M. P. Jenkins
Notes: Formidable challenge
Cellular and molecular imaging of the arteries in the age of precision medicine. BJS 2018; 105: 311-312.
Authors: R. O. Forsythe, D. E. Newby
Comparative analysis of the outcomes of elective abdominal aortic aneurysm repair in England and Sweden. BJS 2018; 105: 520-528.
Authors: A. Karthikesalingam, M. J. Grima, P. J. Holt, A. Vidal‐Diez, M. M. Thompson, A. Wanhainen et al.
Notes: Improving in England
Participation in bowel screening among men attending abdominal aortic aneurysm screening. BJS 2018; 105: 529-534.
Authors: A. J. Quyn, C. G. Fraser, J. Rodger, A. Digan, A. S. Anderson, R. J. C. Steele et al.
Notes: Maximizing screening benefits
Cerebral embolization, silent cerebral infarction and neurocognitive decline after thoracic endovascular aortic repair. BJS 2018; 105: 366-378.
Authors: A. H. Perera, N. Rudarakanchana, L. Monzon, C. D. Bicknell, B. Modarai, O. Kirmi et al.
Notes: Occurs in most