Third generation of laser (>1900) for endovenous thermoablation (EVLA) of varicose veins: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract

Objectives

Third generation lasers with longer wavelengths (>1900 nm) have been introduced, in recent years, for the treatment of varicose veins. The possible advantage of the new generation lasers is that they allow complete damage to the vein wall using a lower Power in Watts (W: J/sec) and a lower linear energy density (LEED: J/cm). The aim of this work is to evaluate the results present in the literature regarding efficacy and safeness of the new generation lasers for the treatment of varicose veins.

Methods

Published articles were searched on PubMed database and on Cochrane Library, entering the keywords “1940 nm or 1920 nm laser AND varicose veins laser thermoablation (EVLA).” The primary endpoint of the study was to value rate of occlusion and adverse events at the short term follow-up. The search yielded a total of 14 studies. In the end, only six studies were judge eligibility.

Results

The studies were heterogenous in their documentation, EVLA, duplex ultrasound protocol and result reporting. A total of 540 limbs of 377 patients were treated with endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) with laser 1920–1940 nm. The treated veins had a mean diameter of 0.74 ± 0.17 cm and a mean length of 27.87 ± 20.63 cm. The pooled estimates of immediate occlusion rate was of 99.8% (95% CI: 97.9% to 100.0) with high heterogeneity (I² = 60%; 95% PI: 89.7% to 100%), while at short-term follow-up was of 98.2% (95% CI: 94.0% to 100.0%) with higher heterogeneity (I²:79%; 95% PI: 77.1% to 100.0%). EHIT occurred in 7 cases (pooled estimate: 0.7%). The other adverse events rate reported were 1% of hyperpigmentation, 2.8% of neurological complications, 0.6% thrombophlebitis and 1.9% of bruising/hematoma. The pooled mean estimates of LEED was equal to 38.2 J/cm (95% CI: 26.3 to 50.1 J/cm) although with a very large heterogeneity (I² = 100%).

Conclusions

The overall success rate of EVLA was high. The analysis of these studies suggests that using lower parameters (Power and linear administered energy) may have no effect on the treatment success rate. Short-term results demonstrate comparable occlusion rates respect the second-generation lasers. Instead, data suggest a low complication rates. Short-term results demonstrate comparable complications rates respect the second-generation lasers (1300-1470 nm). Randomized studies with longer follow-up are required to evaluate the EVLA 1900 nm procedure further.

Keywords

Venous insufficiency endovenous laser ablation (EVLA)laser 1900 nm outcome

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Gloviczki

Comerota

Dalsing

, et al. The care of patients with varicose veins and associated chronic venous diseases: clinical practice guidelines of the Society for Vascular Surgery and the American Venous Forum. J Vasc Surg 2011; 53(5 Suppl): 2S–48S. DOI: 10.1016/j.jvs.2011.01.079

Wittens

Davies

Bækgaard

, et al. Editor’s choice - management of chronic venous disease: clinical practice guidelines of the European society for vascular surgery (ESVS). Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 2015; 49(6): 678–737.

Maeseneer

Kakkos

Aherne

, et al. European society for vascular surgery (ESVS) 2022 clinical practice guidelines on the management of chronic venous disease of the lower limbs. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 2022; 63: 184. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejvs.2021.12.024

Quarto

Amato

Giani

, et al. “Comparison of traditional surgery and laser treatment of incontinent great saphenous vein. Results of a meta-Analysis”. Ann Ital Chir 2016; 87(1): 61–67.

Cowpland

Cleese

Whiteley

. “Factors affecting optimal linear endovenous energy density for endovenous laser ablation in incompetent lower limb truncal veins - a review of the clinical evidence”. Phlebology 2017; 32: 299–306.

Lee

Nicolaides

Myers

, et al. Venous hemodynamic changes in lower limb venous disease: the UIP consensus according to scientific evidence. Int Angiol 2016; 35(3): 236–352.

Mendes-Pinto

Bastianetto

Cavalcanti Braga Lyra

, et al. Endovenous laser ablation of the great saphenous vein comparing 1920-nm and 1470-nm diode laser. Int Angiol 2016; 35(6): 599–604.

Viarengo

LMA

Viarengo

Martins

, et al. Resultados de médio e longo prazo do tratamento endovenoso de varizes com laser de diodo em 1940 nm: análise crítica e considerações técnicas. J Vasc Bras 2017; 16(1): 23–30. DOI: 10.1590/1677-5449.010116

Park

. Initial outcomes of endovenous laser ablation with 1940 nm diode laser in the treatment of incompetent saphenous veins. Vascular 2019; 27(1): 27–32. DOI: 10.1177/1708538118797860

10.

Setia

Schmedt

Beisswenger

, et al. Safety and efficacy of endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) using 1940 nm and radial emitting fiber: 3-year results of a prospective, non-randomized study and comparison with 1470 nm. Laser Surg Med 2022; 54(4): 511–522. DOI: 10.1002/lsm.23500

11.

Fabián

Honěk

Horváth

, et al. Endovenous laser ablation of saphenous veins - favorable clinical results confirm theoretical advantages of the 1940nm diode laser. Rozhl Chir 2022; 101(8):395–400. DOI: 10.33699/PIS.2022.101.8

12.

Bianchi

Martinelli

Quarto

, et al. The evolution of endovenous laser ablation (EVLA). A single-center experience with a 1470 nm versus a 1940 nm diode laser. Ann Ital Chir 2022; 93: 578–583.

13.

Park

. Comparison of short-term outcomes between endovenous 1,940-nm laser ablation and radiofrequency ablation for incompetent saphenous veins. Front Surg 2020; 7: 620034. DOI: 10.3389/fsurg.2020.620034

14.

Vuylsteke

Mordon

. “Endovenous laser ablation: a review of mechanisms of action”. Ann Vasc Surg 2012; 26: 424–433.

15.

Whiteley

Cross

Whiteley

. “No significant Difference between 1940 and 1470 nm in endovenous laser ablation using an in vitro porcine liver model”. Laser Med Sci 2021; 37: 1899–1906.

16.

Niemz

. Biological and medical physics, biomedical enginnering - laser-tissue interactions, fundamentals and applications. 3rd edition. Berlin Heidelberg, New York: Springer, 2007.

17.

Vuylsteke

Liekens

Moons

, et al.

Endovenous laser treatment of saphenous vein reflux: how much energy do we need to prevent recanalizations?

Vasc Endovasc Surg 2008; 42: 141–149.

18.

Doganci

Demirkilic

. Comparison of 980 nm laser and bare-tip fibre with 1470 nm laser and radial fibre in the treatment of great saphenous vein varicosities: a prospective randomised clinical trial. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 2010; 40(2): 254–259.

19.

Artemov

Belyaev

Bushukina

, et al. Morphological changes of veins and perivenous tissues during endovenous laser coagulation using 2-μm laser radiation and various types of optical fibers. J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord. 2021; 10(3): 749–757. DOI: 10.1016/j.jvsv.2021.08.018

20.

Whiteley

. If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck. What “the duck test” tells us about systematic reviews and meta-analyses of LEED and other EVLA parameters. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 2019; 58: 243. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejvs.2019.04.023

21.

Ashpitel

Dabbs

Nemchand

, et al. Histological and immunofluorescent analysis of a large tributary of the great saphenous vein treated with a 1920 nm endovenous laser: preliminary findings. EJVES Short Rep 2018; 39: 7–11. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejvssr.2018.03.003

22.

Healy

Kimura

Power

, et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis of thrombotic events following endovenous thermal ablation of the great saphenous vein. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 2018; 56: 410–424.