Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2015 Jan;31(5):289-96. doi: 10.1017/S0266462315000537. Epub 2015 Dec 30.

COST-EFFECTIVENESS OF RADIOFREQUENCY ABLATION VERSUS LASER FOR VARICOSE VEINS.

Author information

1
Academic Section of Vascular Surgery,Imperial College School of Medicine,Charing Cross Hospital.
2
Department of Applied Economics,University of Granadamortega2@ugr.es.
3
Academic Section of Vascular Surgery,Imperial College School of Medicine,Charing Cross Hospital; andDepartment of Vascular Surgery,Addenbrooke's Hospital Cambridge.
4
Department of Applied Economics,University of Granada.
5
Medical Research Council,Clinical Trials Unit,University College London.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES:

Although the clinical benefits of endovenous thermal ablation are widely recognized, few studies have evaluated the health economic implications of different treatments. This study compares 6-month clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness of endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) compared with radiofrequency ablation (RFA) in the setting of a randomized clinical trial.

METHODS:

Patients with symptomatic primary varicose veins were randomized to EVLA or RFA and followed up for 6 months to evaluate clinical improvements, health related quality of life (HRQOL) and cost-effectiveness.

RESULTS:

A total of 131 patients were randomized, of which 110 attended 6-month follow-up (EVLA n = 54; RFA n = 56). Improvements in quality of life (AVVQ and SF-12v2) and Venous Clinical Severity Scores (VCSS) achieved at 6 weeks were maintained at 6 months, with no significant difference detected between treatment groups. There were no differences in treatment failure rates. There were small differences in favor of EVLA in terms of costs and 6-month HRQOL but these were not statistically significant. However, RFA is associated with less pain at up to 10 days.

CONCLUSIONS:

EVLA and RFA result in comparable and significant gains in quality of life and clinical improvements at 6 months, compared with baseline values. EVLA is more likely to be cost-effective than RFA but absolute differences in costs and HRQOL are small.

KEYWORDS:

Cost-effectiveness; Endovenous laser ablation; Quality of life; Radiofrecuency ablation

PMID:
26715372
DOI:
10.1017/S0266462315000537
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Cambridge University Press
Loading ...
Support Center