Endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) 980 nm versus 1470 nm and the impact of fiber type: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Abstract

We sought to assess the efficacy and safety of endovenous laser ablation utilizing a 980nm device versus a 1470nm device in the treatment of lower limb venous insufficiency. We performed a systematic review adhering to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 statement. A research on PubMed, Scopus and Web of science for articles published by January 2024 was conducted. The primary endpoint was great saphenous vein (GSV) and truncal vein occlusion. Eleven studies encompassing 3061 patients and 3193 truncal veins, were included. The 1470nm device demonstrated superior truncal vein and GSV occlusion outcomes compared to the 980nm device at the early, one-year, and medium to long-term follow-up intervals. Odds ratios (OR) were 2.79(95%CI:1.31-5.94), 2.22(95%CI:1.21-4.07), and 2.02(95%CI:1.24-3.29) for truncal veins and 2.54(95%CI:1.119-5.41), 2.06(95%CI:1.07-3.95) and 2.04(95%CI:1.25-3.33) for GSV, across the respective intervals. While both devices demonstrated minimal, deep vein thrombosis (DVT), endovenous heat-induced thrombosis (EHIT) ≥ 2, and burn estimates, the 1470nm device exhibited improved paresthesia, risk ratio (RR), 0.51(95%CI:0.34-0.77) and pain outcomes, standardized mean difference (SMD), -0.62(95%CI:-0.99to-0.25). Subgroup analysis displayed enhanced occlusion outcomes with the 1470nm device for the six-month and one-year intervals, irrespective of fiber type. Radial fibers were associated with improved paresthesia outcomes (β=-0.9520,p = 0.03). This review emphasized the enhanced efficacy of the 1470nm device over the 980nm device, regardless of fiber type. Radial fibers showed promise for improved paresthesia outcomes, suggesting similar safety profiles for both systems. Conclusive remarks on pain outcomes were impeded by data limitations.