Sclerotherapy versus laser therapy for telangiectasias

Patient or population: people with telangiectasias and reticular veins in the lower limb

Settings: secondary care, outpatient

Intervention: sclerotherapy

Comparison: laser therapy

Outcomes

Illustrative comparative risks* (95% CI)

Relative effect
(95% CI)

No of Participants
(studies)

Quality of the evidence
(GRADE)

Comments

Assumed risk

Corresponding risk

Sclerotherapy

Laser therapy

Clinically or photographically assessed resolution or improvement (or both)

[range of scale or scale description]

[follow up]

[value] per 1000

[value] per 1000

RR [value] ([value] to [value])

[value]
([value])

⊕⊝⊝⊝
very low

⊕⊕⊝⊝
low

⊕⊕⊕⊝
moderate

⊕⊕⊕⊕
high

Adverse events

(including hyperpigmentation, bruising, anaphylaxis, necrosis of the skin)

[range of scale or scale description]

[follow up]

[value] per 1000

[value] per 1000

RR [value] ([value] to [value])

[value]
([value])

⊕⊝⊝⊝
very low

⊕⊕⊝⊝
low

⊕⊕⊕⊝
moderate

⊕⊕⊕⊕
high

Pain during procedure and post procedure

[range of scale or scale description]

[follow‐up]

The mean pain score ranged across control groups from
[value][measure]

The mean pain score in the intervention groups was
[value] [lower/higher]

[value]
([value])

⊕⊝⊝⊝
very low

⊕⊕⊝⊝
low

⊕⊕⊕⊝
moderate

⊕⊕⊕⊕
high

Recurrence

[follow‐up]

[value] per 1000

[value] per 1000
([value] to [value])

RR [value] ([value] to [value])

[value]
([value])

⊕⊝⊝⊝
very low

⊕⊕⊝⊝
low

⊕⊕⊕⊝
moderate

⊕⊕⊕⊕
high

Time to resolution

[range of scale or scale description]

[follow‐up]

The mean time ranged across control groups from
[value][measure]

The mean time in the intervention groups was
[value] [lower/higher]

[value]
([value])

⊕⊝⊝⊝
very low

⊕⊕⊝⊝
low

⊕⊕⊕⊝
moderate

⊕⊕⊕⊕
high

Quality of life

[range of scale or scale description]

[follow‐up]

The mean quality of life score ranged across control groups from
[value][measure]

The mean quality of life score in the intervention groups was
[value] [lower/higher]

[value]
([value])

⊕⊝⊝⊝
very low

⊕⊕⊝⊝
low

⊕⊕⊕⊝
moderate

⊕⊕⊕⊕
high

*The basis for the assumed risk (e.g. the median control group risk across studies) is provided in footnotes. The corresponding risk (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI).
CI: Confidence interval; RR: Risk ratio

GRADE Working Group grades of evidence
High quality: Further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of effect.
Moderate quality: Further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate.
Low quality: Further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate.
Very low quality: We are very uncertain about the estimate.