|
The Cochrane Collaboration
Cochrane Reviews |
| Explore | New + Updated | Other languages |
|
|
|
Phlebotonics for venous insufficiencyMartinez-Zapata MJ, Bonfill Cosp X, Moreno RM, Vargas E, Capellà D SummaryDrugs to improve blood flow for people who have poor blood circulation in the veins of their legs.Insufficient blood flow in the veins of the legs can be something a person is born with the likelihood of developing or may occur after trauma or a blood clot. Poor movement of the blood up the legs may be sufficient to cause swelling and puffiness, and feelings of heaviness, tingling, cramps, pain, varicose veins and skin pigmentation. If severe, ulcers and skin There was evidence from thirteen studies (involving 1245 people), that these drugs reduce puffiness (oedema). Some evidence was found for benefit on skin trophic disorders and restless legs but how relevant these findings are to overall clinical state is not clear. Gastrointestinal disorders were the most frequently reported adverse events in the studies that provided this information.
This is a Cochrane review abstract and plain language summary, prepared and maintained by The Cochrane Collaboration, currently published in The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2009 Issue 4, Copyright © 2009 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley and Sons, Ltd.. The full text of the review is available in The Cochrane Library (ISSN 1464-780X).
This version first published online:
July 20. 2005 AbstractBackgroundChronic venous insufficiency (CVI) is a common condition caused by inadequate blood flow through the veins, usually in the lower limbs. It can result in considerable discomfort with symptoms such as pain, itchiness and tiredness in the legs. Sufferers may also experience swelling and ulcers. Phlebotonics are a class of drugs that are often used to treat CVI. ObjectivesTo assess the efficacy of oral or topical phlebotonics. Search strategyThe Cochrane Peripheral Vascular Diseases Group searched their Specialised Register (last search April 2005) and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library Issue 2, 2005) and reference lists of articles. We also contacted pharmaceutical companies. Selection criteriaRandomised, double blind, placebo-controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the efficacy of rutosides, hidrosmine, diosmine, calcium dobesilate, chromocarbe, centella asiatica, disodium flavodate, french maritime pine bark extract, grape seed extract and aminaftone in CVI patients at any stage of the disease. Data collection and analysisTwo reviewers independently extracted data and assessed trial quality. The effects of treatment were estimated by relative risk (RR) or by standardised mean differences (SMD) by applying a random effects statistical model. Sensitivity analyses were also performed. Main resultsFifty-nine RCTs of oral phlebotonics were included, but only 44 trials involving 4413 participants contained quantifiable data for the efficacy analysis: 23 of rutosides, ten of hidrosmine and diosmine, six of calcium dobesilate, two of centella asiatica, one of french maritime pine bark extract, one of aminaftone and one of grape seed extract. No studies evaluating topical phlebotonics, chromocarbe, naftazone or disodium flavodate fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Outcomes included oedema, venous ulcers, trophic disorders, subjective symptoms (pain, cramps, restless legs, itching, heaviness, swelling and paraesthesias), global assessment measures and side effects. The results of many variables were heterogeneous. Phlebotonics showed some global benefit (i.e. oedema reduction) (relative risk 0.72, 95% confidence interval 0.65 to 0.81). The benefit for the remaining CVI signs and symptoms must be evaluated by phlebotonic group. There were no quantifiable data on quality of life. Authors' conclusionsThere is not enough evidence to globally support the efficacy of phlebotonics for chronic venous insufficiency. There is a suggestion of some efficacy of phlebotonics on oedema but this is of uncertain clinical relevance. Due to the limitations of current evidence, there is a need for further randomised, controlled clinical trials with greater attention paid to methodological quality. |