GET THE APP

Patients Satisfaction with One-Versus Two-Stage Endovenous Laser Ablation and Tributary Veins Foam Sclerotherapy | Abstract
Journal of Clinical Trials

Journal of Clinical Trials
Open Access

ISSN: 2167-0870

+44 20 3868 9735

Abstract

Patients Satisfaction with One-Versus Two-Stage Endovenous Laser Ablation and Tributary Veins Foam Sclerotherapy

Abdullah Al Wahbi

Saphenous varicosities, from Great Saphenous Vein (GSV) and Saphenofemoral Junction (SFJ) are treated by surgery or Endovenous Laser Treatment (EVLT). To treat tributaries, secondary procedures (foam Sclerotherapy or multiple phlebectomy) are used concomitantly as one-stage or sequentially as two-stage procedure. However, patients’ satisfaction quotient post-treatment has not been assessed till date. The present study aimed to compare patient’s satisfaction with EVLT and foam Sclerotherapy as one-stage versus two-stage procedure, performed in the same patient. Patients (n=20, mean age: 38.00 ± 9.9 years, 70% females) with symptomatic bilateral GSV reflux, SFJ incompetence and prominent varicosities between March 2016 and March 2018 were included. All the patients underwent two-stage therapy (EVLT-four-week gap-foam Sclerotherapy) on one leg first and one-stage EVLTFoam Sclerotherapy on the other after four-week gap. Post-treatment, all patients were provided with a six-point questionnaire to evaluate their satisfaction for both the procedures. Both the procedures took similar time (one-stage: 57.1 ± 3.5 (range: 47-62) minutes vs. two-stage: 47.35 ± 3.1 (range: 40-52) minutes for EVLT and 8.00 ± 1.49 (range: 5-10) minutes for foam Sclerotherapy). There was nominal median time difference between both the procedures (57.5 vs. 56 minutes). All the patients agreed that one-stage procedure is better than two-stage (strongly agreed n=18 (90%); agreed n=2 (10%). All the patients strongly agreed that one-stage procedure was better for going back to usual activities. None of them preferred two-stage procedure over one-stage procedure. The present study concluded that both the procedures were similar in terms of time consumed and overall discomfort. However, the patients were more satisfied after undergoing single-stage procedure than two-stage due to speedy recovery and higher convenience associated with concomitant therapy.