The safest power to be applied in relation to diameter of the vein to give maximal benefit with least complications in endovenous laser ablation of varicose veins

Abstract

Background Over the years, there have been significant advancements in the treatment of varicose veins. In most surgical settings, the open procedure is still the primary approach. Yet, the popularity of less invasive procedures like EVLA and RFA has produced fantastic outcomes. Objective to assess the safest power of laser which gives maximal effect and least complications in ablation of varicose veins. Methodology A prospective observational study inducing EVLA of different laser power settings (7W & 10W) with preoperative assessment then follow up by CEAP & VCSS and duplex ultrasound measuring great saphenous vein (GSV) diameter and also post-operative complications and time to return to work. Results This study included 50 patients (52 limbs). The Patients were distributed as regard laser power used into two groups (7W, 10W) of 26 limbs for each one. As regard GSV measures changes, there was highly statistically significant decrease in GSV diameter after 1 m and after 3 m compared to preoperative, with P value P<0.001, among patients group. Also, there is higher number of cases with GSV>10 mm in power of laser ‘10w’ group compared to ‘7w; group, with P value (P<0.001); while there is no statistically significant difference between power of laser 7w versus 10w, because all patients ≤10 mm after 1 month and after 3 months, with P value >0.05.Statistically there was no significant difference between 7W & 10W groups as regards time to return to work, CEAP scores and postoperative complications except the significant difference in Pain over the treated vein being less in 7W laser power group. Conclusion For endovenous laser ablation of varicose veins, both 7W and 10W laser power are indicated. They are risk-free and provide the greatest impact with the fewest difficulties for the chosen vein diameter. In our investigation, we came to the conclusion that patients with small GSV diameter required low laser power (7W), while those with large GSV diameter required high laser power (10W).