Five-Year Outcomes of a Randomized Trial of Treatments for Varicose Veins
- PMID: 31483962
- DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1805186
Five-Year Outcomes of a Randomized Trial of Treatments for Varicose Veins
Abstract
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<0.001; and for surgery vs. foam sclerotherapy, -2.60; 95% CI, -3.99 to -1.22; P<0.001). Generic quality-of-life measures did not differ among treatment groups. At a threshold willingness-to-pay ratio of £20,000 ($28,433 in U.S. dollars) per QALY, 77.2% of the cost-effectiveness model iterations favored laser ablation. In a two-way comparison between foam sclerotherapy and surgery, 54.5% of the model iterations favored surgery.
Conclusions: In a randomized trial of treatments for varicose veins, disease-specific quality of life 5 years after treatment was better after laser ablation or surgery than after foam sclerotherapy. The majority of the probabilistic cost-effectiveness model iterations favored laser ablation at a willingness-to-pay ratio of £20,000 ($28,433) per QALY. (Funded by the National Institute for Health Research; CLASS Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN51995477.).
Copyright © 2019 Massachusetts Medical Society.
Comment in
-
Five-Year Outcomes of a Randomized Trial of Treatments for Varicose Veins.N Engl J Med. 2019 Dec 5;381(23):2275. doi: 10.1056/NEJMc1914045. N Engl J Med. 2019. PMID: 31800998 No abstract available.
-
Treatment Modalities for Varicose Veins of Lower Extremities.J Cutan Med Surg. 2020 Mar/Apr;24(2):203-204. doi: 10.1177/1203475419891082. J Cutan Med Surg. 2020. PMID: 32208017 No abstract available.
Similar articles
-
Clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of foam sclerotherapy, endovenous laser ablation and surgery for varicose veins: results from the Comparison of LAser, Surgery and foam Sclerotherapy (CLASS) randomised controlled trial.Health Technol Assess. 2015 Apr;19(27):1-342. doi: 10.3310/hta19270. Health Technol Assess. 2015. PMID: 25858333 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
-
Cost-effectiveness of ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy, endovenous laser ablation or surgery as treatment for primary varicose veins from the randomized CLASS trial.Br J Surg. 2014 Nov;101(12):1532-40. doi: 10.1002/bjs.9595. Br J Surg. 2014. PMID: 25274220 Clinical Trial.
-
A randomized trial comparing treatments for varicose veins.N Engl J Med. 2014 Sep 25;371(13):1218-27. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1400781. N Engl J Med. 2014. PMID: 25251616 Clinical Trial.
-
Endovenous ablation therapy (laser or radiofrequency) or foam sclerotherapy versus conventional surgical repair for short saphenous varicose veins.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Nov 29;11(11):CD010878. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010878.pub2. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016. PMID: 27898181 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of minimally invasive techniques to manage varicose veins: a systematic review and economic evaluation.Health Technol Assess. 2013 Oct;17(48):i-xvi, 1-141. doi: 10.3310/hta17480. Health Technol Assess. 2013. PMID: 24176098 Free PMC article. Review.
Cited by
-
Chronic Venous Disease of the Lower Extremities: A State-of-the Art Review.J Soc Cardiovasc Angiogr Interv. 2022 Nov 26;2(1):100538. doi: 10.1016/j.jscai.2022.100538. eCollection 2023 Jan-Feb. J Soc Cardiovasc Angiogr Interv. 2022. PMID: 39132527 Free PMC article. Review.
-
The Other Side of Chronic Venous Disorder: Gaining Insights from Patients' Questions and Perspectives.J Clin Med. 2024 Apr 26;13(9):2539. doi: 10.3390/jcm13092539. J Clin Med. 2024. PMID: 38731068 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Patient perceptions and preferences of minimally invasive treatment modalities in varicose veins: a cross-sectional survey.Front Cardiovasc Med. 2024 Apr 25;11:1382764. doi: 10.3389/fcvm.2024.1382764. eCollection 2024. Front Cardiovasc Med. 2024. PMID: 38725833 Free PMC article.
-
Comparative effectiveness of non-compounded polidocanol 1% endovenous microfoam (Varithena) ablation versus endovenous thermal ablation utilizing a systematic review and network meta-analysis.J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord. 2024 Nov;12(6):101896. doi: 10.1016/j.jvsv.2024.101896. Epub 2024 Apr 26. J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord. 2024. PMID: 38679141 Free PMC article.
-
Disparities in access to endovenous treatment options in chronic lower extremity superficial venous insufficiency: A national 7-year analysis.J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord. 2024 Jul;12(4):101867. doi: 10.1016/j.jvsv.2024.101867. Epub 2024 Mar 5. J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord. 2024. PMID: 38452897 Free PMC article.
