Comparative analysis of the use of endovenous laser coagulation and radiofrequency vein obliteration in patients who have previously undergone sclerobliteration

A. Chernookov, M. R. Kuznetsov, S. Kandyba, A. Atayan, G. V. Sinyavin, E. Belykh, A. Nikolaev, T. I. Shadyzheva, A. Z. Pshmakhova
{"title":"Comparative analysis of the use of endovenous laser coagulation and radiofrequency vein obliteration in patients who have previously undergone sclerobliteration","authors":"A. Chernookov, M. R. Kuznetsov, S. Kandyba, A. Atayan, G. V. Sinyavin, E. Belykh, A. Nikolaev, T. I. Shadyzheva, A. Z. Pshmakhova","doi":"10.21518/akh2023-021","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction. Sclerobliteration of varicose veins of the lower extremities is one of the most common methods of treating patients with varicose veins. However, the main disadvantage of echosclerobedation of the trunks of the great and small saphenous veins is the possibility of recanalization of sclerosed veins. In this regard, it is of interest to compare the results of using radiofrequency vein obliteration and endovenous laser coagulation in these patients. Aim. To study the effectiveness, advantages and disadvantages of the use of radiofrequency vein obliteration and endovenous laser photocoagulation of recanalized varicose veins in patients undergoing sclerobliteration. Materials and methods. 44 patients aged 18 to 62 years underwent radiofrequency obliteration and endovenous laser coagulation of varicose veins after previous sclerobliteration. A comparative assessment of the duration of the operation, technical success, intensity of the pain syndrome, the level of postoperative complications and relapses of the disease after the use of these methods of recanalized saphenous veins after previous sclerotherapy was made. Results and discussion. The technical success of endovenous laser coagulation of reknalizirovanny varicose veins was 100%, radiofrequency obliteration of veins – 90.9%. The intensity of postoperative pain on the 7th day from the moment of radio wave exposure was 12.1% lower than after the use of endovenous laser coagulation, the average duration of laser thermolysis was 32 ± 0.6 minutes, radio wave – 39 ± 0.7 minutes. Conclusion. Laser coagulation compared to radiofrequency is a more reliable and feasible operation, but is accompanied by a higher level of postoperative pain and side effects.","PeriodicalId":398195,"journal":{"name":"Ambulatornaya khirurgiya = Ambulatory Surgery (Russia)","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ambulatornaya khirurgiya = Ambulatory Surgery (Russia)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21518/akh2023-021","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction. Sclerobliteration of varicose veins of the lower extremities is one of the most common methods of treating patients with varicose veins. However, the main disadvantage of echosclerobedation of the trunks of the great and small saphenous veins is the possibility of recanalization of sclerosed veins. In this regard, it is of interest to compare the results of using radiofrequency vein obliteration and endovenous laser coagulation in these patients. Aim. To study the effectiveness, advantages and disadvantages of the use of radiofrequency vein obliteration and endovenous laser photocoagulation of recanalized varicose veins in patients undergoing sclerobliteration. Materials and methods. 44 patients aged 18 to 62 years underwent radiofrequency obliteration and endovenous laser coagulation of varicose veins after previous sclerobliteration. A comparative assessment of the duration of the operation, technical success, intensity of the pain syndrome, the level of postoperative complications and relapses of the disease after the use of these methods of recanalized saphenous veins after previous sclerotherapy was made. Results and discussion. The technical success of endovenous laser coagulation of reknalizirovanny varicose veins was 100%, radiofrequency obliteration of veins – 90.9%. The intensity of postoperative pain on the 7th day from the moment of radio wave exposure was 12.1% lower than after the use of endovenous laser coagulation, the average duration of laser thermolysis was 32 ± 0.6 minutes, radio wave – 39 ± 0.7 minutes. Conclusion. Laser coagulation compared to radiofrequency is a more reliable and feasible operation, but is accompanied by a higher level of postoperative pain and side effects.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
静脉内激光凝固术和射频静脉阻塞术在曾接受过硬化剂吸除术的患者中的应用对比分析
导言。下肢静脉曲张硬化消融术是治疗静脉曲张患者最常用的方法之一。然而,大隐静脉和小隐静脉主干回声硬化消融术的主要缺点是硬化的静脉有可能再通。因此,比较射频静脉阻塞术和静脉腔内激光凝固术对这些患者的治疗效果很有意义。研究目的研究使用射频静脉阻断术和静脉腔内激光光凝术治疗接受硬化性静脉曲张患者再通静脉的有效性和优缺点。材料和方法。44 名年龄在 18 至 62 岁之间的患者在接受过硬化剂洗脱术后接受了射频静脉阻塞和静脉腔内激光凝固术治疗静脉曲张。对比评估了使用这些方法治疗硬化剂治疗后重新闭塞的隐静脉的手术时间、技术成功率、疼痛综合征的强度、术后并发症的程度以及疾病的复发情况。结果与讨论。静脉内激光凝固再通静脉曲张的技术成功率为100%,静脉射频消融术的成功率为90.9%。从射频波照射开始的第7天,术后疼痛强度比使用静脉内激光凝固术后疼痛强度低12.1%,激光热溶解的平均持续时间为32±0.6分钟,射频波--39±0.7分钟。结论与射频相比,激光凝固术是一种更可靠、更可行的手术,但术后疼痛和副作用较高。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Combined use of oral and topical forms of phlebotonics after endovasal laser coagulation One-day surgery: treatment of grade 3–4 hemorrhoids in a day patient department Multifocal superficial thrombophlebitis of the extremities in HIV infection Possible complications associated with the use of cyanoacrylate obliteration in patients with varicose veins Chronic venous diseases and obesity: pathogenetically based treatment and prevention options
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1