...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>European journal of vascular and endovascular surgery: the official journal of the European Society for Vascular Surgery >Cost and effectiveness of laser with phlebectomies compared with foam sclerotherapy in superficial venous insufficiency. Early results of a randomised controlled trial
【24h】

Cost and effectiveness of laser with phlebectomies compared with foam sclerotherapy in superficial venous insufficiency. Early results of a randomised controlled trial

机译：浅静脉静脉功能不全时，采用静脉切除术与泡沫硬化疗法比较的成本和效果。随机对照试验的早期结果

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Objectives: Quantify endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) with concurrent phlebectomies and ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy (UGFS) in cost and effectiveness at 3 weeks and 3 months. Design: Single-centre, prospective, randomised controlled trial. Patients: One hundred patients (100 legs), C 2-6, age 21-78, M:F 42:58, with primary varicose veins received either EVLA under local anaesthetic or UGFS. Methods: Assessments included duplex, Aberdeen varicose vein questionnaire (AVVQ), venous clinical severity score (VCSS), venous filling index (VFI), visual analogue 7-day pain score and analgesia requirements. Additional treatments with UGFS were performed, if required. Micro-costing, using individually timed treatments, was based on consumables, staff pay and overheads. Results: Changes in AVVQ, VCSS and VFI values (3 months) did not demonstrate any significant difference between groups. At 3 months, the above-knee GSV occlusion rate (without co-existing reflux) was not significantly different between the groups (74% vs 69%; EVLA vs UGFS; P = .596). Of the 9 haemodynamic failures in each group, 7 EVLA patients and 4 UGFS patients had co-existing cross-sectional above-knee GSV occlusion at some point. However, UGFS significantly outperformed EVLA in cost, treatment duration, pain, analgesia requirements and recovery. Conclusions: UGFS is 3.15 times less expensive than EVLA (￡230.24 vs ￡724.72) with comparable effectiveness but 56% (versus 6%) required additional foam (ISRCTN:03080206).
机译：目标：量化并发静脉切除术和超声引导的泡沫硬化疗法（UGFS）的静脉激光消融（EVLA）在3周和3个月时的成本和效果。设计：单中心，前瞻性，随机对照试验。患者：一百名患者（100条腿），C 2-6，年龄21-78，M：F 42:58，原发性静脉曲张接受局麻或EVFS麻醉。方法：评估包括双工，阿伯丁静脉曲张问卷（AVVQ），静脉临床严重程度评分（VCSS），静脉充盈指数（VFI），视觉模拟7天疼痛评分和镇痛要求。如果需要，可以使用UGFS进行其他治疗。使用单独计时的处理方法的微成本计算是基于消耗品，员工工资和间接费用的。结果：AVVQ，VCSS和VFI值的变化（3个月）未显示两组之间有任何显着差异。 3个月时，两组之间膝上GSV闭塞率（无反流共存）无显着差异（74％vs 69％; EVLA vs UGFS; P = .596）。在每组的9例血液动力学衰竭中，有7例EVLA患者和4例UGFS患者在某一点同时存在横断面膝上GSV闭塞。但是，UGFS在成本，治疗持续时间，疼痛，镇痛要求和恢复方面明显优于EVLA。结论：UGFS的价格比EVLA便宜3.15倍（.230.24比￡ 724.72），但效果却相当，但56％（相对6％）需要额外的泡沫（ISRCTN：03080206）。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号