Varicose veins of the lower extremities are one of the most common venous disorders in clinical practice and are an ancient and common condition that occurs in approximately 10%-15% of adult men and 20-25% of adult women who develop symptomatic saphenous varicose veins. It is defined as an incomplete closure of the valves of the superficial veins of the lower extremities for various reasons, resulting in venous reflux and subsequent dilatation of the diseased vein walls with irregular bulging and twisting. The most common form of varicose veins is the saphenous vein, which is a tortuous, dilated vein in the region of the saphenous vein and its branches. If left untreated, it may progress to venous skin lesions, including ankle edema, lower extremity skin pigmentation, eczema, ulcer formation, cellulitis, thrombotic superficial phlebitis, and ruptured bleeding. The description and treatment of varicose veins was written as early as 1550 BC. Hipprocrate B.C. described that those with calf ulcers should not stand during treatment. trendelenbury first used high saphenous vein ligation in 1891, based on which Homans began applying stripping to remove varicose veins in 1916, and Linton used ligation of traffic branch veins in 1938, laying the foundation for the later primary lower extremity The classic radical procedure for varicose veins. With the development of technology and instruments, the minimally invasive surgical approach has improved the shortcomings of pain, trauma, activity restriction and slow recovery caused by traditional surgery, allowing patients to achieve aesthetic and rapid recovery in a short period of time, and has been rapidly developing at home and abroad in recent years. Due to the differences in geography or training, the same surgical method has different operation methods in various places and units, thus leading to different surgical results. The author has earlier contacted and applied minimally invasive surgery, and the considerations for the specific operation of radiofrequency intracavitary closure and transillumination direct vision spinotomy are summarized as follows: I. Minimally invasive surgery is not the purpose Compared with traditional Minimally invasive surgery has more advantages than traditional surgery, such as: beautiful, small trauma, fast recovery, less complications, etc. But we need to remember: the purpose of surgery is to treat the disease, minimally invasive is only a means of treating the disease, there are many minimally invasive means of treating varicose veins, but each of them has corresponding indications as well as relative contraindications, we cannot pursue minimally invasive and use one way for all patients. If we use one way for all patients, it will lead to more complications and recurrence rate, thus losing the meaning of minimally invasive. Second, the combination of multiple modalities The treatment of varicose veins in lower limbs is aimed at the treatment of saphenous vein (small saphenous vein) trunk, varicose vein mass, traffic vein, ulcer, etc. The current laser, radiofrequency, microwave, small incision inversion peeling, etc. are mainly aimed at the treatment of vein trunk, while sclerotherapy, transillumination direct vision rotary cutting, electrocoagulation have advantages in the treatment of varicose vein mass, regarding the treatment of traffic vein, lumpectomy traffic branch surgery ( SEPS) has the advantage of accurate localization and exact efficacy, and some scholars have also applied transilluminated direct-view spinotomy and electrocoagulation here. For most patients requiring surgical treatment, there are multiple problems of venous trunk, varicose vein masses and even traffic veins, which require a combination of the different means mentioned above to achieve a shorter operative time and complete treatment. Third, the application of radiofrequency intracavitary closure The method of radiofrequency ablation has been successfully used in cardiology to treat arrhythmias. Tests have shown that the high-frequency waves of 200-300 kHz do not stimulate the neuromuscular cells, so the destruction of tissue structure by radiofrequency methods is safer than other methods. The treatment mechanism is only in a limited range of contact with the transmitting electrode.