A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 143

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 143
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 209
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 994
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3134
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 574
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 488
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

A comparison of three tumescent delivery systems in endovenous laser ablation of the great saphenous vein. | LitMetric

AI Article Synopsis

  • A study evaluated three different systems for delivering tumescent solution during endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) for treating varicose veins.
  • The 60 participants were split into three groups, each using a different system: a syringe with a needle, an infusion bag, and a peristaltic pump.
  • Results showed that although the peristaltic pump had the shortest delivery time, all systems had similar outcomes, indicating no major advantages for any specific delivery method in terms of effectiveness or cost-efficiency.

Article Abstract

Different systems for delivering tumescent solution exist in endovenous laser ablation (EVLA). This study evaluated three different tumescent delivery systems in patients with primary varicose veins due to great saphenous vein reflux who were treated with EVLA. In this prospective non-randomized study, 60 patients with isolated GSV varicose veins were divided into three groups. All patients received EVLA treatment. Three different tumescent solution delivery systems were used. Systems consisted of a needle and a syringe in Group 1, a needle connected to an infusion bag system in Group 2 and a peristaltic infiltration pump in Group 3. Tumescent delivery durations were in Group 1: 6.56 SD 1.18 minutes, Group 2: 6.05 SD 2.19 minutes and Group 3: 5.19 SD 1.15 minutes (P = 0.014). In the outcomes of the study there were no significant difference between groups. Although peristaltic pump systems might provide shorter tumescent delivery durations without hand fatigue, shorter duration does not have any practical importance (about 1 minute and also it is not cost-effective. For delivering tumescent solutions in EVLA procedures, there was no major superiority between systems.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1708538112473972DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

tumescent delivery
16
three tumescent
12
delivery systems
12
endovenous laser
8
laser ablation
8
great saphenous
8
saphenous vein
8
delivering tumescent
8
tumescent solution
8
varicose veins
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!

A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Notice

Message: fwrite(): Write of 34 bytes failed with errno=28 No space left on device

Filename: drivers/Session_files_driver.php

Line Number: 272

Backtrace:

A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: session_write_close(): Failed to write session data using user defined save handler. (session.save_path: /var/lib/php/sessions)

Filename: Unknown

Line Number: 0

Backtrace: