Development of recommendations for the use of venoactive drugs in the treatment of chronic venous disease – where they are effective and where they are not
Authors:
Dalibor Musil
Authors‘ workplace:
Interní a kardiologická klinika Fakultní nemocnice Ostrava a LF Ostravské univerzity
Published in:
Vnitř Lék 2022; 68(4): 234-239
Category:
Review Articles
Overview
The article provides an overview of the development of recommendations for indications of venoactive drugs for treating symptoms and signs associated with chronic venous disease (CVD). Venoactive drugs may be beneficial in patients with subjective problems and/or swelling of the lower limbs, after surgery for varicose veins, in chronic venous insufficiency or in microcirculatory disorders. They are not indicated in asymptomatic patients with CVD, in the prevention of varicose veins or to prevent their progression. Drugs with proven efficacy in clinical trials should be preferred.
Keywords:
Randomized controlled trials – venoactive drugs – pentoxifylline – sulodexide – strenght of recommendation – level of evidence – GRADE – symptomatic treatment
Sources
1. Roztočil K. Venotonika – komu a která? s. 51 – 53, In: Broulíková A, Bulvas M, Karetová D. Angiologie 2007, trendy soudobé angiologie. Praha: Galen; 2007, 105 s.
2. Martinez MJ, Bonfill X, Moreno RM et al. Phlebotonics for venous insufficiency. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2005: CD003229.
3. Ramelet AA, Boisseau MR, Allegra C, Nikolaies A et al. Veno‑active drugs in the management of chronic venous disease. An international consensus statement: current medical position, prospective views and final resolution. Clin Hemorheol Microcirc. 2005;33:309-319.
4. Coleridge‑Smith P, Lok C, Ramelet AA. Venous leg ulcer: a meta‑analysis of adjunctive therapy with micronized purified flavonoid fraction. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2005;30:198-208.
5. Jull AB, Arroll B, Parag W, Waters J. Pentoxifylline for treating venous leg ulcers. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012; 12: CD001733.
6. Wu B, Lu J, Yang M, Xu T. Sulodexide for treating venous leg ulcers. Cochrane Database of Systemic Reviews. 2016, issue 6. Art. No: CD010694.
7. Cocceri S, Bignamini AA. Pharmacological adjuncts for chronic venous ulcer healing. Phlebology. 2016;31:366-367.
8. Paseerrin M, Ramelet AA. Pharmacological treatment of primary venous disease: rationale, results and unanswered questions. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2011; 41: 117-125.
9. Jantet G. Chronic venous insufficiency: worldwide results of the RELIEF study. Reflux assEssment and quaLIty of lIfe improvEment with micronized Flavonoids. Angiology. 2002;53:245-256.
10. Zapater P, Horga JF, Garcia A. Risk of drug‑induced agranulocytosis: the case of calcium dobesilate. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2000;58:767-772.
11. Allaert FA. Meta‑analysis of the impact of the principal venoactice drugs agents on malleolar venous edema. Int Angiol. 2012;31:310-315.
12. Allaert FA, Hugue C, Cazaubon M et al. Correlation between improvement in fuctional signs and plethysmographic parameters during venoactive treatment (Cyclo 3 Fort). Int Angiol. 2011;30:272-277.
13. Rabe E, Jaeger KA, Bulitta M, Panier F. Calcium dobesilate in patients suffering from venous insufficiency: a double‑blind, placebo‑controlled, clinical trial. Phlebology. 2011;26:162-168.
14. Labs KH, Degisher S, Gamba G et al. Effectiveness and safety of calcium dobesilate in treating chronic venous insufficiency: randomized double‑blind, placebo‑controlled trial. Phlebology. 2004;19:123-130.
15. Flota‑Cervera F, Flota‑Ruiz CF, Trevino C, Berber A. Randomized, double‑blind, placebo‑controlled clinical trial to evaluate the lymphagogue effect and clinical efficacy of calcium dobesilate in chronic venous disease. Angiology. 2008;59:352-356.
16. Martínez‑Zapata MJ, Moreno RM, Gich I et al. A randomized, double‑blind multicentre clinical trial comparing the efficacy of calcium dobesilate with placebo in the treatment of chronic venous disease. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2008;35:358-365.
17. Nicolaides A, Kakkos S, Baekgaard N et al. Management of chronic venous disorders of the lower limbs. Guidelines According to Scientific Evidence. Part I. Int Angiol. 2018;37:232-254.
18. Perrin M, Eklof B, VAN Rij A et al. Venous symptoms: the SYM Vein Consensus statement developer under the auspices of the European Venous Forum. Int Agiol. 2016;35:374-398.
19. De Souza MGC, Cyrino FZ, Mayal M et al. Beneficial effect of the micronized purified flavonoid fraction (MPFF, Daflon 500 mg) on microvascular damage elicited by sclerotherapy. Phlebology. 2016;31:50-56.
20. Bogachev VY, Boldin BV, Lobanov VN. Benefit of micronized purified flavonoid fraction as adjuvant therapy on the inflammatory response after sclerotherapy. Int Angiol. 2018; 37: 71-78.
21. Mazzaccaro D, Muzzarelli I, Modafferi A et al. Use of venoactive drugs after surgery for varicose veins: a preliminary study. Int Angiol. 2018;37:79-84.
Labels
Diabetology Endocrinology Internal medicineArticle was published in
Internal Medicine
2022 Issue 4
Most read in this issue
- Development of recommendations for the use of venoactive drugs in the treatment of chronic venous disease – where they are effective and where they are not
- Acetylsalicylic acid in primary prevention of cardiovascular disease
- Urapidil: an unknown / known antihypertensive
- Acute kidney injury due to antimicrobial therapy