American Heart Journal
American Heart Journal
5 years ago

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Endovascular and Surgical Revascularization for Patients with Chronic Lower Extremity Venous Insufficiency and Varicose Veins

Chronic lower extremity venous disease (LECVD) is twice as prevalent as coronary heart disease and invasive therapies to treat LECVD accounted for an estimated $290 million in Medicare expenditures in 2015. Despite increasing use of these invasive therapies, their comparative effectiveness is unknown. Methods We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of treatments for patients (symptomatic and asymptomatic) with lower extremity varicosities and/or lower extremity chronic venous insufficiency/incompetence/reflux. Searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for relevant English-language studies published from January 2000 to July 2016. We included comparative randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with >20 patients and observational studies with >500 patients. Short, intermediate, and long-term outcomes of placebo, mechanical compression therapy, and invasive therapies (surgical and endovascular) were included. Quality ratings and evidence grading was performed. Random-effects models were used to compute summary estimates of effects. Results We identified a total of 57 studies representing 105,878 enrolled patients, including 53 RCTs comprised of 10,034 patients. Among the RCTs 16 were good quality, 28 were fair quality, and 9 were poor quality. Allocation concealment, double blinding, and reporting bias were inadequately addressed in 25/53 (47%), 46/53 (87%), and 15/53 (28.3%), respectively. Heterogeneity in therapies, populations, and/or outcomes prohibited meta-analysis of comparisons between different endovascular therapies and between endovascular intervention and placebo/compression. Meta-analysis evaluating venous stripping plus ligation (HL/S) compared with radiofrequency ablation (RFA) revealed no difference in short term bleeding [OR=0.30 95% CI -0.16 to 5.38, P =.43] or reflux recurrence at 1–2years [OR=0.76, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.55, P =.44]. Meta-analysis evaluating HL/S versus endovascular laser ablation revealed no difference in long-term symptom score [OR 0.02, 95% CI -0.19 to 0.23, P =.84], or quality of life at 2years [OR 0.06, 95% CI -0.12 to 0.25, P =.50]. Conclusions The paucity of high quality comparative effectiveness and safety data in chronic lower extremity venous disease is concerning given the overall rise in endovascular procedures. More high-quality studies are needed to determine comparative effectiveness and guide policy and practice.

Publisher URL: www.sciencedirect.com/science

DOI: S0002870317303009

You might also like
Discover & Discuss Important Research

Keeping up-to-date with research can feel impossible, with papers being published faster than you'll ever be able to read them. That's where Researcher comes in: we're simplifying discovery and making important discussions happen. With over 19,000 sources, including peer-reviewed journals, preprints, blogs, universities, podcasts and Live events across 10 research areas, you'll never miss what's important to you. It's like social media, but better. Oh, and we should mention - it's free.

  • Download from Google Play
  • Download from App Store
  • Download from AppInChina

Researcher displays publicly available abstracts and doesn’t host any full article content. If the content is open access, we will direct clicks from the abstracts to the publisher website and display the PDF copy on our platform. Clicks to view the full text will be directed to the publisher website, where only users with subscriptions or access through their institution are able to view the full article.