亲爱的研友该休息了!由于当前在线用户较少,发布求助请尽量完整的填写文献信息,科研通机器人24小时在线,伴您度过漫漫科研夜!身体可是革命的本钱,早点休息,好梦!

CHIVA method for the treatment of chronic venous insufficiency

医学 静脉曲张 慢性静脉功能不全 随机对照试验 回廊的 奇纳 梅德林 置信区间 相对风险 荟萃分析 物理疗法 外科 重症监护医学 内科学 心理干预 精神科 政治学 法学
作者
Sergi Bellmunt-Montoya,José María Escribano,Percy Efrain Pantoja,Cristina Tello-Díaz,María José Martínez‐Zapata
出处
期刊:The Cochrane library [Elsevier]
卷期号:2021 (9) 被引量:25
标识
DOI:10.1002/14651858.cd009648.pub4
摘要

Many surgical approaches are available to treat varicose veins secondary to chronic venous insufficiency. One of the least invasive techniques is the ambulatory conservative hemodynamic correction of venous insufficiency method (in French 'cure conservatrice et hémodynamique de l'insuffisance veineuse en ambulatoire' (CHIVA)), an approach based on venous hemodynamics with deliberate preservation of the superficial venous system. This is the second update of the review first published in 2013.To compare the efficacy and safety of the CHIVA method with alternative therapeutic techniques to treat varicose veins.The Cochrane Vascular Information Specialist searched the Cochrane Vascular Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, AMED, and the World Health Organisation International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov trials registries to 19 October 2020. We also searched PUBMED to 19 October 2020 and checked the references of relevant articles to identify additional studies.We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared CHIVA to other therapeutic techniques to treat varicose veins.Two review authors independently assessed and selected studies, extracted data, and performed quantitative analysis from the selected papers. A third author solved any disagreements. We assessed the risk of bias in included trials with the Cochrane risk of bias tool. We calculated the risk ratio (RR), mean difference (MD), number of people needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB), and the number of people needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH), with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We evaluated the certainty of the evidence using GRADE. The main outcomes of interest were the recurrence of varicose veins and side effects.For this update, we identified two new additional studies. In total, we included six RCTs with 1160 participants (62% women) and collected from them eight comparisons. Three RCTs compared CHIVA with vein stripping. One RCT compared CHIVA with compression dressings in people with venous ulcers. The new studies included three comparisons, one compared CHIVA with vein stripping and radiofrequency ablation (RFA), and one compared CHIVA with vein stripping and endovenous laser therapy. We judged the certainty of the evidence for our outcomes as low to very low due to inconsistency, imprecision caused by the low number of events and risk of bias. The overall risk of bias across studies was high because neither participants nor personnel were blinded to the interventions. Two studies attempted to blind outcome assessors, but the characteristics of the surgery limited concealment. Five studies reported the outcome clinical recurrence of varicose veins with a follow-up of 18 months to 10 years. CHIVA may make little or no difference to the recurrence of varicose veins in the lower limb compared to stripping (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.46 to 1.20; 5 studies, 966 participants; low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether CHIVA reduced recurrence compared to compression dressing (RR 0.23, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.96; 1 study, 47 participants; very low-certainty evidence). CHIVA may make little or no difference to clinical recurrence compared to RFA (RR 2.02, 95% CI 0.74 to 5.53; 1 study, 146 participants; low-certainty evidence) and endovenous laser (RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.01 to 4.06; 1 study, 100 participants; low-certainty evidence). We found no clear difference between CHIVA and stripping for the side effects of limb infection (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.33 to 2.10; 3 studies, 746 participants; low-certainty evidence), and superficial vein thrombosis (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.51 to 2.17; 4 studies, 846 participants; low-certainty evidence). CHIVA may reduce slightly nerve injury (RR 0.14, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.98; NNTH 9, 95% CI 5 to 100; 4 studies, 846 participants; low-certainty evidence) and hematoma compared to stripping (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.97; NNTH 11, 95% CI 5 to 100; 2 studies, 245 participants; low-certainty evidence). For bruising, one study found no differences between groups while another study found reduced rates of bruising in the CHIVA group compared to the stripping group. Compared to RFA, CHIVA may make little or no difference to rates of limb infection, superficial vein thrombosis, nerve injury or hematoma, but may cause more bruising (RR 1.15, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.28; NNTH 8, CI 95% 5 to 25; 1 study, 144 participants; low-certainty evidence). Compared to endovenous laser, CHIVA may make little or no difference to rates of limb infection, superficial vein thrombosis, nerve injury or hematoma. The study comparing CHIVA versus compression did not report side effects.There may be little or no difference in the recurrence of varicose veins when comparing CHIVA to stripping (low-certainty evidence), but CHIVA may slightly reduce nerve injury and hematoma in the lower limb (low-certainty evidence). Very limited evidence means we are uncertain of any differences in recurrence when comparing CHIVA with compression (very low-certainty evidence). CHIVA may make little or no difference to recurrence compared to RFA (low-certainty evidence), but may result in more bruising (low-certainty evidence). CHIVA may make little or no difference to recurrence and side effects compared to endovenous laser therapy (low-certainty evidence). However, we based these conclusions on a small number of trials with a high risk of bias as the effects of surgery could not be concealed, and the results were imprecise due to the low number of events. New RCTs are needed to confirm these results and to compare CHIVA with approaches other than open surgery.
最长约 10秒,即可获得该文献文件

科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI
更新
大幅提高文件上传限制,最高150M (2024-4-1)

科研通是完全免费的文献互助平台,具备全网最快的应助速度,最高的求助完成率。 对每一个文献求助,科研通都将尽心尽力,给求助人一个满意的交代。
实时播报
所所应助科研通管家采纳,获得30
4秒前
桐桐应助科研通管家采纳,获得10
4秒前
云飞扬完成签到 ,获得积分10
25秒前
xj发布了新的文献求助10
28秒前
CATH完成签到 ,获得积分10
38秒前
zqq完成签到,获得积分0
1分钟前
小马甲应助YUYUYU采纳,获得10
1分钟前
Arthur完成签到 ,获得积分10
1分钟前
河豚完成签到 ,获得积分10
1分钟前
早晚完成签到 ,获得积分10
1分钟前
2分钟前
CipherSage应助Langsam采纳,获得10
2分钟前
顾矜应助吃碗大米饭采纳,获得10
2分钟前
2分钟前
谢小盟完成签到 ,获得积分10
2分钟前
2分钟前
will214发布了新的文献求助10
2分钟前
高贵魂幽完成签到,获得积分10
3分钟前
有魅力寒凡完成签到,获得积分10
3分钟前
初雪平寒发布了新的文献求助10
3分钟前
初雪平寒完成签到,获得积分10
3分钟前
感动的醉波完成签到,获得积分10
3分钟前
will214发布了新的文献求助10
4分钟前
茜你亦首歌完成签到 ,获得积分10
4分钟前
斯文败类应助科研通管家采纳,获得10
4分钟前
orixero应助科研通管家采纳,获得10
4分钟前
王柯文完成签到,获得积分10
4分钟前
自由的梦露完成签到 ,获得积分10
4分钟前
无极2023完成签到 ,获得积分10
4分钟前
在水一方应助kakakaku采纳,获得10
5分钟前
6分钟前
Langsam发布了新的文献求助10
6分钟前
6分钟前
6分钟前
6分钟前
kakakaku发布了新的文献求助10
6分钟前
ShowMaker应助风中绝悟采纳,获得20
7分钟前
石鑫发布了新的文献求助20
7分钟前
snah完成签到 ,获得积分10
7分钟前
香蕉觅云应助石鑫采纳,获得10
7分钟前
高分求助中
Evolution 10000
Sustainability in Tides Chemistry 2800
юрские динозавры восточного забайкалья 800
English Wealden Fossils 700
Diagnostic immunohistochemistry : theranostic and genomic applications 6th Edition 500
Chen Hansheng: China’s Last Romantic Revolutionary 500
China's Relations With Japan 1945-83: The Role of Liao Chengzhi 400
热门求助领域 (近24小时)
化学 医学 生物 材料科学 工程类 有机化学 生物化学 物理 内科学 纳米技术 计算机科学 化学工程 复合材料 基因 遗传学 催化作用 物理化学 免疫学 量子力学 细胞生物学
热门帖子
关注 科研通微信公众号,转发送积分 3150515
求助须知:如何正确求助?哪些是违规求助? 2801908
关于积分的说明 7845974
捐赠科研通 2459264
什么是DOI,文献DOI怎么找? 1309180
科研通“疑难数据库(出版商)”最低求助积分说明 628683
版权声明 601748