A systematic review of the compression regimes used in randomised clinical trials following endovenous ablation

Abstract

Objectives There is insufficient evidence to inform guidelines on the optimal compression strategy following ablation for varicose veins. This study aimed to identify the practice of key opinion leaders performing randomised clinical trials involving endovenous ablation. Method A systematic review of MEDLINE/EMBASE/CENTRAL was performed identifying the compression strategies used in randomised clinical trials where at least one comparator arm underwent endovenous ablation. Results Thirty-four randomised clinical trials were identified. At least 14 different compression products were used, with at least 6 different pressures in 7 different regimes with durations from 2 to 84 days. There was no evidence of any convergence of practice over time. Conclusions A lack of evidence as to the optimal strategy for compression has resulted in a marked variation in clinical practice. There is no suggestion that this variation is becoming less over time indicating that experience is not helping to form a consensus and, therefore, further research is required.