Home > Riviste > International Angiology > Fascicoli precedenti > International Angiology 2016 December;35(6) > International Angiology 2016 December;35(6):599-604

ULTIMO FASCICOLO
 

ARTICLE TOOLS

Estratti

INTERNATIONAL ANGIOLOGY

Rivista di Angiologia


Official Journal of the International Union of Angiology, the International Union of Phlebology and the Central European Vascular Forum
Indexed/Abstracted in: BIOSIS Previews, Current Contents/Clinical Medicine, EMBASE, PubMed/MEDLINE, Science Citation Index Expanded (SciSearch), Scopus
Impact Factor 1,37


eTOC

 

ORIGINAL ARTICLES  


International Angiology 2016 December;35(6):599-604

Copyright © 2016 EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA

lingua: Inglese

Endovenous laser ablation of the great saphenous vein comparing 1920-nm and 1470-nm diode laser

Daniel MENDES-PINTO 1, Paulo BASTIANETTO 1, Lívia CAVALCANTI BRAGA LYRA 1, Rodrigo KIKUCHI 2, Lowell KABNICK 3

1 Department of Vascular Surgery, Children ABC Hospital, Mater Dei Hospital and Vascular BH Institute, Belo Horizonte, Brazil; 2 Vascular Excellence Clinic, São Paulo, Brazil; 3 Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Langone Medical Center, New York University, New York, NY, USA


PDF  


BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to compare venous occlusion rates at a one-year follow-up comparing 1920-nm versus 1470-nm endolaser.
METHODS: Randomized prospective study with consecutive patients with varicose veins associated to great saphenous reflux. The 1470-nm laser ablation was performed in continuous mode, with power of 10 W, while for the 1920-nm it was set in 5 W. Follow-up data were collected at the 7-day, 30-day, 3-month, 6-month and 1-year visits, and involved clinical, ultrasound evaluation and measurement of occlusion length.
RESULTS: Sixty seven patients were included, with 42 limbs operated in the 1470-nm group and 48 limbs in the 1920-nm group. There were no differences in relation to age, CEAP (Clinical, Etiologic, Anatomical and Pathological Classification), VCSS (Venous Clinical Severity Score) and saphenous diameter. The resulting LEED in 1920-nm group was 17.8±0.6 J/cm and vs. 24.7±0.8 J/cm in 1470-nm group (P<0.01). Closure rates were lower for the 1920-nm group: 90.9% vs. 96.8% (P=0.06) at 30 days, 87.5% vs. 96.3% at 6 months (P=0.03), and 87.5% vs. 94.7% (P=0.05) at one year. The 1920-nm group had less ecchymosis (18.7% vs. 52.4%), induration (12.4% vs. 38.1%) and days of analgesic use (1.4±0.2 vs. 2.4±0.4). CEAP and VCSS were reduced over time in both groups.
CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with endolaser 1920-nm was feasible and with reduced complications. The use of low endoluminal energy resulted in lower vein occlusion rates comparing to the 1470-nn laser. Clinical outcome scores were similar between groups.

inizio pagina

Publication History

Per citare questo articolo

Corresponding author e-mail

daniel@vascularbh.com.br