Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2016 May;31(4):234-40.
doi: 10.1177/0268355515595194. Epub 2015 Jul 9.

A review of randomised controlled trials comparing ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy with endothermal ablation for the treatment of great saphenous varicose veins

Affiliations
Review

A review of randomised controlled trials comparing ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy with endothermal ablation for the treatment of great saphenous varicose veins

Huw Ob Davies et al. Phlebology. 2016 May.

Abstract

Objective: The last 10 years have seen the introduction into everyday clinical practice of a wide range of novel non-surgical treatments for varicose veins. In July 2013, the UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence recommended the following treatment hierarchy for varicose veins: endothermal ablation, ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy, surgery and compression hosiery. The aim of this paper is to review the randomised controlled trials that have compared endothermal ablation and ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy to determine if the level 1 evidence base still supports an "endothermal ablation first" strategy for the treatment of varicose veins.

Methods: A PubMed and OVID literature search (until 31 January 2015) was performed and randomised controlled trials comparing endothermal ablation and ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy were obtained.

Results: Although anatomical success appeared higher with endothermal ablation than ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy, clinical success and patient-reported outcomes measures were similar. Morbidity and complication rates were very low and not significantly different between endothermal ablation and ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy. Ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy was consistently less expensive that endothermal ablation.

Conclusions: All endovenous modalities appear to be successful and have a role in modern day practice. Although further work is required to optimise ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy technique to maximise anatomical success and minimise retreatment, the present level 1 evidence base shows there is no significant difference in clinical important outcomes between ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy and endothermal ablation. As ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy is less expensive, it is likely to be a more cost-effective option in most patients in most healthcare settings. Strict adherence to the treatment hierarchy recommended by National Institute for Health and Care Excellence seems unjustified.

Keywords: Varicose veins; endovenous technique; endovenous thermal ablation; foam sclerotherapy; randomised controlled trial.

PubMed Disclaimer