Surgical management of great saphenous vein varicose veins: A meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to synthesise the available evidence of randomised controlled trials comparing endovenous laser therapy to traditional open surgery, high ligation and stripping, for the treatment of great saphenous vein varicose veins in terms of clinical effectiveness, patient satisfaction and peri-operative complications. METHODS: MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE and the Cochrane library were searched to identify eligible studies. All randomised controlled trials comparing endovenous laser therapy to high ligation and stripping that used ultrasound examination as an outcome measure and had follow up of one year or more were included. The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias was also used to assess the methodological quality of the included studies. Pooled risk ratios with 95% confidence intervals were used as the measure of effect for each dichotomous outcome. FINDINGS: Nine eligible publications relating to six randomised controlled trials were identified. The total enrolment of the studies was 1289 limbs. The clinical efficacy of endovenous laser therapy is comparable to that of surgery in the relatively short follow up period described in the studies. Meta-analysis revealed a trend towards a higher risk of ultrasound recurrence after endovenous laser therapy at 12 months. Quality of life questionnaires reveal similar outcomes for endovenous laser therapy and surgery. There is low quality evidence to suggest surgery is associated with more pain, sensory complications and infection. CONCLUSION: Endovenous laser therapy is a safe alternative to traditional open surgery. There is some weak evidence to suggest that endovenous laser therapy has a higher risk of ultrasound-detected recurrence at 12 months following treatment compared to open surgery. However, it may be associated with less sensory complications, pigmentation and infection.

Clinical unity and community empowerment: the use of smartphone technology to empower community management of chronic venous ulcers through the support of a tertiary unit.

BACKGROUND: Chronic ulcers affect roughly 60,000 Irish people, at a total cost of €600,000,000, or €10,000 per patient annually. By virtue of their chronicity, these ulcers also contribute a significant burden to tertiary outpatient vascular clinics. OBJECTIVE: We propose utilizing mobile phone technology to decentralise care from tertiary centres to the community, improving efficiency and patient satisfaction, while maintaining patient safety. METHODS: Bespoke mobile software was developed for Apples iPhone 4 platform. This allowed for the remote collection of patient images prospectively and their transmission with clinical queries, from the primary healthcare team to the tertiary centre. Training and iPhones were provided to five public health nurses in geographically remote areas of the region. Data were uploaded securely and user end software was developed allowing the review and manipulation of images, along with two way communication between the teams. Establishing reliability, patients were reviewed clinically as well as remotely, and concordance analysed. Qualitative data were collected through focus group discussion. RESULTS: From October to December 2011 eight patients (61-83 yrs, mean 75.3 yrs) with chronic venous ulceration and their five public health nurses were recruited. Data were transmitted using 3 G, Edge, GPRS and WiFi, at a mean speed of 69.03 kps. Concordance was 100% for wound bed assessment, 80% for skin integrity/colour and 60% for exudate assessment. Focus group analysis explored the concept, practicalities and future applications of the system. CONCLUSIONS: With an evolving national data network, the secure transmission of clinical images is a safe alternative to regular clinic appointments for patients with chronic venous ulceration. With further development, and packaged as a freely downloadable application, this has the potential to support the community care of chronic wounds.

Prospective study of use of perioperative antimicrobial therapy in general surgery.

BACKGROUND: Perioperative antimicrobial therapy has demonstrated efficacy in reducing the rate of surgical site infections in clinical trials. With the emergence of antibiotic resistance, the risk of reaction, and the inevitable financial repercussions, use of prophylactic antibiotics is not a panacea, and their misuse may have considerable implications. The aim of this study was to assess the use of antibiotics in the perioperative period in both general and vascular surgery procedures. METHODS: A prospective study was undertaken of 131 patients with a mean age of 43 years (range one month-88 years), of whom 68 (51%) were male, who underwent twenty-seven different general or vascular surgery procedures over a four-week period. Each patient was evaluated from the time of antibiotic commencement through their operative procedure until the treatment was discontinued. RESULTS: A total of 73 patients (54%) received ten antibiotics, with 71 (97%) of these uses being prophylactic. Of the 15 appendectomies performed for uncomplicated appendicitis, the mean number of prophylactic antibiotic doses was 5.3 (range 1-12). Where they were documented, written postoperative directives were not adhered to in 18/27 prescriptions (66%). CONCLUSION: This study has demonstrated a lack of adherence to guidelines in the perioperative administration of antimicrobial agents. In addition, it calls attention to the economic implications of unnecessary prophylaxis.