Evidence
This page contains a snapshot of featured content which highlights evidence addressing key clinical questions including areas of uncertainty. Please see the main topic reference list for details of all sources underpinning this topic.
BMJ Best Practice evidence tables
Evidence tables provide easily navigated layers of evidence in the context of specific clinical questions, using GRADE and a BMJ Best Practice Effectiveness rating. Follow the links at the bottom of the table, which go to the related evidence score in the main topic text, providing additional context for the clinical question. Find out more about our evidence tables.
This table is a summary of the analysis reported in a Cochrane Clinical Answer that focuses on the above important clinical question.
Confidence in the evidence is moderate or low to moderate where GRADE has been performed and the intervention may be more effective/beneficial than the comparison for key outcomes.
Population: Adults with short saphenous vein varices
Intervention: EVLA
Comparison: Conventional surgery
| Outcome | Effectiveness (BMJ rating)? | Confidence in evidence (GRADE)? |
|---|---|---|
Recanalisation or persistence of reflux at 6 weeks | Favours intervention | Moderate |
Recurrence of reflux at 1 year | Favours intervention | Low |
Clinical evidence of recurrence after 1 year | No statistically significant difference | Low |
Reintervention due to technical failure | See note ᵃ | Moderate |
Disease‐specific quality of life (QOL) at 6 weeks | No statistically significant difference | Moderate |
Disease‐specific QOL at 1 year | No statistically significant difference | Low |
Complications at 6 weeks | See note ᵇ | Moderate |
Note The Cochrane review which underpins this Cochrane Clinical Answer (CCA) noted that future randomised controlled trials (RCTs) should include a longer follow-up period (ideally at least 5 years). It also noted that outcome measurements and time points during follow-up should be standardised to help ensure that future studies can compare newer technologies efficiently. ᵃ One RCT (99 participants) reported that 8 people (4 in each group) required reintervention (second EVLA or ultrasound-guided perforator ligation). ᵇ Two RCTs (265 participants) reported sural nerve injury at 6 weeks as the main complication (EVLA group 11/61 [18.0%] versus conventional surgery 30/104 [28.8%]); other reported complications included wound infection, haematoma, pigmentation bruising, and phlebitis. See CCA for more details.
This evidence table is related to the following section/s:
Cochrane Clinical Answers
Cochrane Clinical Answers (CCAs) provide a readable, digestible, clinically focused entry point to rigorous research from Cochrane systematic reviews. They are designed to be actionable and to inform decision making at the point of care and have been added to relevant sections of the main Best Practice text.
- How does endovenous laser ablation therapy (EVLA) compare with conventional surgical repair for people with short saphenous varicose veins?
Use of this content is subject to our disclaimer