Ultrasound guided sclerotherapy combined with sapheno-femoral ligation was less expensive, involved a shorter treatment time and resulted in more rapid recovery compared to sapheno-femoral ligation, saphenous stripping and phlebectomies.

No abstract

UGFS is 3.15 times less expensive than EVLA (£230.24 vs £724.72) with comparable effectiveness but 56% (versus 6%) required additional foam (ISRCTN:03080206).

Compression significantly improved all hemodynamic parameters on air plethysmography. However, the hemodynamic benefit did not significantly change with the class or length of stocking. These results support the liberal selection of a GEC stocking based on patient preference.

At 3 and 5 years of follow-up, the treatment was equally effective in the surgical and foam groups, as demonstrated with VCSS, VSDS, and the SF-36 physical component score. At 5 years, the AVVQ was significantly better in the surgical group. The additional foam sessions were also similar. Because traditional surgery for varicose veins does not provide a definitive treatment, foam sclerotherapy could be offered as in a dental care treatment model: "treat as and when the problem appears."

This is the first study to quantify the venous return of below-knee GEC stockings. Assessments of stockings in augmenting venous return may be of use as a way of optimising compression for individual patients unresponsive to standard conservative treatment.

Rationing treatment of varicose veins (VVs) is of importance in countries with a public health service and limited funds. This study examines why and how the Aberdeen varicose vein questionnaire (AVVQ) can be used in achieving rationing. Baseline assessments prior to endovenous treatment included the venous clinical severity score (VCSS), venous filling index (VFI), and the refluxing great saphenous vein (GSV) diameter. Absolute change in the AVVQ defined improvement. There was no significant correlation in AVVQ improvement compared to baseline VCSS, VFI, GSV diameter or when patients were divided into mild and severe disease (C2,3 vs C4-6) or laser ablation versus foam sclerotherapy. However, AVVQ improvement significantly correlated at 3 weeks (n = 84) and 3 months (n = 70) with their baseline values (r = .5 and r = .585), P < .0005 (Spearman). In conclusion, patients with an initial poor quality of life may benefit most from endovenous treatment, irrespective of other baseline severity assessments.

The majority of the individual questions of the VCSS and AVVQ responded to change. However, the cause of a poor response was multifactorial with statistical dilution playing a significant role. Stratification of patients according to ulceration may allow better comparisons.