الفهرس 
IntroductionOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 141 |  |  |
| | | from | 141 | | |
Abstract
Varicose vein is a chronic venous disorder (CVD) characterized by dilated, tortuous, and elongated veins of the lower limbs and located in the subcutaneous plane, 3 mm or more in size, measured in the erect posture and with demonstrable reflux. Several complications are associated with VVs such as spontaneous varix rupture with hemorrhage, superficial thrombophlebitis, DVT and venous ulceration. Patients with varicose veins present from asymptomatic to significant symptoms, including discomfort, aching, pain, itching or eczema, and deep vein thrombosis (DVT). The diagnosis of varicose veins is based on clinical manifestation and ultrasound. Duplex ultrasound is considered the gold standard for diagnosis of superficial venous incompetence. Until recently, conventional surgery of the great saphenous vein (GSV), consisting of high ligation at the saphenofemoral junction (SFJ) and stripping of the above knee GSV, was the standard of care. In the last decade, minimally invasive techniques such as endovenous laser ablation (EVLA), radiofrequency ablation (RFA), and ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy (UGFS) have replaced the position of conventional surgery in treatment of primary varicose veins. EVLA and RFA have been approved by Food and Drug Administration since March 2004, and its use is gradually becoming more widespread as its benefits become apparent. EVLA can be performed under local anesthesia. It has a lower complication rate, and avoids incisions. It is less painful, there is less blood loss and it allows early return to work. - Endovenous treatment techniques are performed without high ligation, which may be an advantage. Additional advantages of EVLA, RFA, and UGFS over conventional surgery (CS) are that they can be easily performed in an ambulatory setting. A comparative meta-analysis of observational studies and randomized clinical trials (RCTs) demonstrated that both EVLA and RFA were superior to CS and UGFS. The aim of our study is to compare between EVLA and RFA in treatment of varicose veins and the rate of recurrence and patient satisfaction. Our study was conducted on 30 patients, half of them underwent laser ablation and the others underwent Radiofrequency ablation. The cost of surgical intervention is proven to be a less costeffective treatment option compared to the endovenous methods. The high cost of EVLA and RF catheters remains one of the main stumbling blocks in our study. The choice of varicose vein treatment to use in current practice is determined by its cost-effectiveness thereby, making surgery increasingly harder to justify. Hence, endovenous thermal ablation will be the treatment of choice in the near future. This study showed that RFA produced less ecchymosis and thermal injury than EVLA using a 1470 nm Biolytic system but EVLA is better than RFA in large GSV diameter which exceeds 12 mm.