Abstract
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 912-922 |
| Number of pages | 11 |
| Journal | New England Journal of Medicine |
| Volume | 381 |
| Issue number | 10 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 5 Sep 2019 |
Fingerprint
Cite this
}
Five-year outcomes of a randomized trial of treatments for varicose veins. / Brittenden, Julie; Cotton, Seonaidh; Cooper, David; Dimitrova, Maria; Scotland, Graham; Elders, Andrew; MacLennan, Graeme; Ramsay, Craig; Norrie, J; Burr, Jennifer; Campbell, Bruce; Bachoo, Paul; Chetter, Ian; Gough, Michael; Earnshaw, Jonothan; Lees, Tim; Scott, Julian; Baker, Sara; Tassie, Emma; Francis, Jill; Campbell, Marion.
In: New England Journal of Medicine, Vol. 381, No. 10, 05.09.2019, p. 912-922.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article
TY - JOUR
T1 - Five-year outcomes of a randomized trial of treatments for varicose veins
AU - Brittenden, Julie
AU - Cotton, Seonaidh
AU - Cooper, David
AU - Dimitrova, Maria
AU - Scotland, Graham
AU - Elders, Andrew
AU - MacLennan, Graeme
AU - Ramsay, Craig
AU - Norrie, J
AU - Burr, Jennifer
AU - Campbell, Bruce
AU - Bachoo, Paul
AU - Chetter, Ian
AU - Gough, Michael
AU - Earnshaw, Jonothan
AU - Lees, Tim
AU - Scott, Julian
AU - Baker, Sara
AU - Tassie, Emma
AU - Francis, Jill
AU - Campbell, Marion
N1 - Acceptance in SAN AAM: not permitted by journal VoR provided by author; 6m embargo required. ET 13/9/19
PY - 2019/9/5
Y1 - 2019/9/5
N2 - BACKGROUND Endovenous laser ablation and ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy are recommended alternatives to surgery for the treatment of primary varicose veins, but their long-term comparative effectiveness remains uncertain. METHODS In a randomized, controlled trial involving 798 participants with primary varicose veins at 11 centers in the United Kingdom, we compared the outcomes of laser ablation, foam sclerotherapy, and surgery. Primary outcomes at 5 years were disease-specific quality of life and generic quality of life, as well as cost-effectiveness based on models of expected costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained that used data on participants' treatment costs and scores on the EuroQol EQ-5D questionnaire. RESULTS Quality-of-life questionnaires were completed by 595 (75%) of the 798 trial participants. After adjustment for baseline scores and other covariates, scores on the Aberdeen Varicose Vein Questionnaire (on which scores range from 0 to 100, with lower scores indicating a better quality of life) were lower among patients who underwent laser ablation or surgery than among those who underwent foam sclerotherapy (effect size [adjusted differences between groups] for laser ablation vs. foam sclerotherapy, -2.86; 95% confidence interval [CI], -4.49 to -1.22; P
AB - BACKGROUND Endovenous laser ablation and ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy are recommended alternatives to surgery for the treatment of primary varicose veins, but their long-term comparative effectiveness remains uncertain. METHODS In a randomized, controlled trial involving 798 participants with primary varicose veins at 11 centers in the United Kingdom, we compared the outcomes of laser ablation, foam sclerotherapy, and surgery. Primary outcomes at 5 years were disease-specific quality of life and generic quality of life, as well as cost-effectiveness based on models of expected costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained that used data on participants' treatment costs and scores on the EuroQol EQ-5D questionnaire. RESULTS Quality-of-life questionnaires were completed by 595 (75%) of the 798 trial participants. After adjustment for baseline scores and other covariates, scores on the Aberdeen Varicose Vein Questionnaire (on which scores range from 0 to 100, with lower scores indicating a better quality of life) were lower among patients who underwent laser ablation or surgery than among those who underwent foam sclerotherapy (effect size [adjusted differences between groups] for laser ablation vs. foam sclerotherapy, -2.86; 95% confidence interval [CI], -4.49 to -1.22; P
U2 - 10.1056/NEJMoa1805186
DO - 10.1056/NEJMoa1805186
M3 - Article
VL - 381
SP - 912
EP - 922
JO - New England Journal of Medicine
JF - New England Journal of Medicine
SN - 0028-4793
IS - 10
ER -