Comparative cost analysis of saphenectomy and radiofrequency ablation in the treatment of great saphenous vein incompetence.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to assess the cost differences between two techniques for treating great saphenous vein incompetence: conventional surgerysaphenectomy and radiofrequency ablation. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective observational cohort study, selecting 40 patients for the radiofrequency cohort and 80 for the saphenectomy cohort. Sociodemographic, baseline, clinical, and ultrasound follow-up data were collected at 10 days and one-month post-intervention. Finally, a cost analysis was performed from the perspective of both the public health system and society, with indirect costs related to sick leave evaluated in the latter perspective. RESULTS: At the 10-day follow-up, hematoma incidence was significantly higher in the saphenectomy group (22 cases, 27.5% vs. 3 cases, 7.5%). The average Visual Analogue Scale pain score was higher in the radiofrequency group (2.1±1.8 vs. 1.1±1.7); however, mean analgesic consumption was higher in the saphenectomy group. From a cost perspective, the expense for the public health system was higher for radiofrequency (3167.2€ ± 123.4 vs. 3066.6€ ± 205.8). However, both sick leave costs (2276.6€ ± 1209.4 vs. 1105.8€ ± 1265.8) and total cost (5357.1€ ± 1246.1 vs. 4286.3€ ± 1294.8) were higher in the saphenectomy group. CONCLUSIONS: Radiofrequency ablation is a safe technique, allowing for an earlier return to normal work activities, with a low rate of complications and short- and medium-term efficacy at least equivalent to open surgery. The inclusion of radiofrequency ablation in our health system may yield overall cost savings compared to saphenectomy in the surgical treatment of great saphenous vein incompetence.