BACKGROUND: Limited data are available about treatment-related side effects with respect to laser wavelength in endovenous laser treatment (ELT) of the great saphenous vein (GSV). OBJECTIVE: To compare the results and side effects of a 940 nm diode and a 1,320 nm neodymium:yttium-aluminum-garnet (Nd:YAG) laser. METHODS: Three patient cohorts (A, B, and C) received ELT of the GSV using a 940 nm diode laser at 15 W (group A) or 30 W (group B) or using a 1,320 nm laser at 8 W (group C). In all cases, energy was administered continuously with constant pullback of the laser fiber under perivenous tumescent local anesthesia. RESULTS: The GSVs of group A (n = 113), group B (n = 136), and group C (n = 33) received ELT. An average linear endovenous energy density of 24, 63, and 62 J/cm and an average endovenous fluence equivalent of 12, 30, and 33 J/cm2 were administered to the vein. Occlusion rates were 95% (group A), 100% (group B), and 100% (group C) at day 1 after ELT and 90.3% (group A), 100% (group B), and 97% (group C) at 3 months after ELT. With the 1,320 nm laser ELT (group C), treatment-related pain (50%) and the need for analgesics (36%) were significantly reduced (p < .005) in comparison with treatment-related pain (81%) and the need for analgesics (67%) after the 30 W 940 nm laser ELT (group B). Ecchymosis was also significantly reduced (p < .05) in group C (1,320 nm) compared with group B (30 W, 940 nm). CONCLUSION: ELT of the GSV using a 1,320 nm Nd:YAG laser causes fewer side effects compared with 940 nm diode laser ELT.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Proebstle et al. (2005) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: