MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.23736/s0392-9590.25.05284-8

Медицинская библиотека · International angiology : a journal of the International Union of Angiology · 2025

A review of clinical efficacy, safety, and quality of life of ClosureFast™ radiofrequency ablation of saphenous vein insufficiency.

Rial Rodrigo, Garg Megha, Pooley Nick, Ducaju Guillermo M, Doth Alissa, Joaquim Ines

СтатьяСистематический обзорПеревод пока не подготовлен

Аннотация

INTRODUCTION

This review aimed to systematically identify the efficacy, safety, and quality of life of ClosureFast™ radio frequency ablation (RFA) compared with other treatments for saphenous vein insufficiency.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A systematic literature search was conducted using MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, World Health Organization-International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and ClinicalTrials.gov from the time of their inception to June 2021. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing ClosureFast™ to surgery, endovenous laser ablation (EVLA), mechanochemical ablation (MOCA), foam sclerotherapy, or cyanoacrylate closure (CAC) were eligible for inclusion.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Thirty-two publications, representing 21 RCTs were included. Clinical efficacy (procedure success/failure) for ClosureFast™ was significantly better compared to Foam, MOCA, and other RFA devices, significantly poorer than CAC; and similar to high ligation and division, stripping, and EVLA. Symptom alleviation was similar between therapies; however, one study reported significantly worse symptom scores for ClosureFast™ compared to CAC. Compared with ClosureFast™, patients receiving EVLA treatment exhibited significantly higher pain scores, whereas CAC, MOCA, and other RFA groups reported lower pain scores. ClosureFast™ showed significantly lower rates of minor complications compared with EVLA in three studies, with rates of complication comparable with other treatments. ClosureFast™ patients returned to work or normal activity faster than surgical but slower than CAC patients. There was no difference in health-related quality of life and patient satisfaction between treatments.

CONCLUSIONS

ClosureFast™ has overall higher safety than EVLA and surgery, with better clinical efficacy than Foam, MOCA, and other RFA devices. Efficacy and safety of ClosureFast™ is comparable to or lower than CAC.

Для цитирования: Rial Rodrigo, Garg Megha, Pooley Nick, Ducaju Guillermo M, Doth Alissa, Joaquim Ines. A review of clinical efficacy, safety, and quality of life of ClosureFast™ radiofrequency ablation of saphenous vein insufficiency.. International angiology : a journal of the International Union of Angiology. 2025. DOI: 10.23736/s0392-9590.25.05284-8.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

История · было → стало

Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.