Chronic venous insufficiency

  • Robert M. Schainfeld

Opinion statement

Patients with chronic venous insufficiency arguably have been relegated to a standard of care that is lower than that for those with the more appealing entity of peripheral arterial disease. Fortunately, the collaboration of an expanding group of clinicians (including cardiologists and vascular medicine specialists) with vascular surgeons is stimulating a renewed interest in the management of patients afflicted with venous disease. With the increased level of awareness of venous disease, technologic advances undoubtedly will augment the armamentarium available for the treatment of patients with chronic venous insufficiency. The focus on the prevention of venous thromboembolic complications has been advanced greatly, as witnessed by the growth of new pharmacologic agents, such as heparinoids, antiplatelet agents, direct thrombin inhibitors, thrombolytics, and pentasaccharides. In addition, the more aggressive strategy of intervening in acute deep venous obstruction by using thrombolytic agents and adjunctive mechanical thrombectomy devices potentially may obviate the future sequelae of chronic venous insufficiency. The tremendous growth of endovascular techniques in recent years has revolutionized the management of problems due to acute and chronic arterial obstructive disease. The application of these techniques in the future may have a similar impact in improving the clinical outcomes of patients with chronic venous disease and potentially, if proven safe and efficacious in clinical trials, may lower the threshold for intervention to an earlier disease stage. Similarly, with the advent of endovascular and endoscopic techniques, surgical procedures will also continue to evolve, with these procedures complementing one another, as opposed to serving as surrogates, which traditionally has been the case.


Varicose Vein Venous Disease Venous Ulcer Chronic Venous Insufficiency Chronic Venous Insufficiency 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References and Recommended Reading

  1. 1.
    Brand FN, Dannenberg AL, Abbott RD, Kannel WB: The epidemiology of varicose veins: the Framingham study. Am J Prev Med 1988, 4:96–101.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Widmer LK: Peripheral Venous Disorders: Prevalence and Sociomedical Importance-Observations in 4529 Apparently Healthy Persons. Basle III Study. Bern, Germany: Hans Huber; 1978.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Coon WW, Willis PW III, Keller JB: Venous thromboembolism and other venous disease in the Tecumseh community health study. Circulation 1973, 48:839–846.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Baker SR, Stacey MC, Jopp-Mckay AG, et al.: Epidemiology of chronic venous ulcers. Br J Surg 1991, 78:864–867.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Abenhaim L, Kurx X, and VEINES study collaborators: The VEINES study: an international cohort study on chronic venous disorders of the leg. Angiology 1997, 48:59–66.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fowkes FGR, Evans CJ, Lee AJ: Prevalence and risk factors of chronic venous insufficiency. Angiology 2001, 52(suppl 1):S5-S15.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Miller WL: Chronic venous insufficiency. Cardiovasc Clin 1992, 22:67–80.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    The Consensus Group: Classification and grading of chronic venous disease in the lower limb: a consensus statement. Vasc Surg 1996, 30:5–11. Due to the important changes in diagnostic techniques and treatment modalities in the field of chronic venous disease, it becomes imperative to standardize the evaluation of suspected patients. The CEAP classification and grading system, as adopted by the Consensus Group, accomplishes this task in defining both functional and anatomic information necessary to objectively justify a particular treatment strategy, thereby ensuring the greatest likelihood of clinical success, tailored to each individual patient’s case.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Welch HJ, Faliakou EC, McLaughlin RL, et al.: Comparison of descending phlebography with quantitative photoplethysmography, air plethysmography, and duplex quantitative valve closure time in assessing deep venous reflux. J Vasc Surg 1992, 16:913–919.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Christopoulos DG, Nicolaides AN, Szendro G, et al.: Air-plethysmography and the effects of elastic compression on venous hemodynamics of the leg. J Vasc Surg 1987, 5:148–159.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Morano JU, Raju S: Chronic venous insufficiency: assessment with descending venography. Radiology 1990, 174:441–444.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bergan JJ: Conrad Jobst and the development of pressure gradient therapy for venous disease. In Surgery of the Veins. Edited by Bergan JJ, Yao JS. Orlando, FL: Grune & Stratton; 1985:529–540.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Mayberry JC, Moneta GL, DeGrang RD, Porter JM: The influence of elastic compression stockings on deep venous hemodynamics. J Vasc Surg 1991, 13:91–99.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Unna PG: Ueber Paraplaste, eine neue Form medika-mentoser Pflaster. Wien Med Wochenschr 1896, 43:1854.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Vernick SH, Shapiro D, Shaw FD: Legging orthosis for venous and lymphatic insufficiency. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1987, 68:459–461.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Cordts PR, Hanrahan LM, Rodriguez AA, et al.: A prospective, randomized trial of Unna’s boot versus Duo-DERM CGF hydroactive dressing plus compression in the management of venous leg ulcers. J Vasc Surg 1992, 15:480–486.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Phillips A, Davidson M, Greaves MW: Venous leg ulcerations: evaluation of zinc treatment, serum zinc and rate of healing. Clin Exp Dermatol 1977, 2:395–399.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    McMullin GM, Watkin GT, Coleridge Smith PD, Scurr JH: The efficacy of fibrinolytic enhancement with stanozolol in the treatment of venous insufficiency. Aust N Z J Surg 1991, 61:306–309.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Pulvertaft TB: General practice treatment of symptoms of venous insufficiency with oxerutins: results of a 660 patient multicenter study in the UK. Vasa 1983, 12:373–376.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Mann RJ: A double-blind trial of oral 0-beta-hydroxyethyl rutosides for stasis leg ulcers. Br J Clin Pract 1981, 35:79–81.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Casley-Smith JR: A double-blind trial of calcium dobesilate in chronic venous insufficiency. Angiology 1988, 39:853–857.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Jantet G: RELIEF Study: first consolidated European data. Angiology 2000, 51:31–37.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Bergan JJ, Schmid-Schonbein GW, Takase S: Therapeutic approach to chronic venous insufficiency and its complications: place of daflon 500 mg. Angiology 2001, 52(suppl):S43-S47.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Sullivan GW, Carper HT, Novick WJ, Mandell GL: Inhibition of the inflammatory action of interleukin-1 and tumor necrosis factor (alpha) on neutrophil function by pentoxifylline. Infect Immunol 1988, 56:1722.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Weitgasser H: The use of pentoxifylline (Trental 400) in the treatment of leg ulcers: the results of a double blind trial. Pharmatherapeutica 1983, 3(suppl 1):143.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Layton AM, Ibbotson SH, Davies JA, et al.: Randomised trial of oral aspirin for chronic venous leg ulcers. Lancet 1994, 344:164–165.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Salim AS: The role of oxygen-derived free radicals in the management of venous (varicose) ulceration: a new approach. World J Surg 1991, 15:264–269.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Rudofsky G: Intravenous prostaglandin E1 in the treatment of venous ulcers: a double-blind, placebo controlled trial. Vasa 1989, 28(suppl):39–43.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Diehm C, Trampisch HJ, Lange S, Schmidt C: Comparison of leg compression stockings and oral horse-chestnut seed extract in patients with chronic venous insufficiency. Lancet 1996, 347:292–294.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Gilchrist B, Reed C: The bacteriology of chronic venous ulcers treated with occlusive hydrocolloid dressings. Br J Dermatol 1989, 121:337–344.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Hillstrom L: Iodosorb compared to standard treatment in chronic venous leg ulcers: a multicenter study. Acta Chir Scand Suppl 1988, 544:53–56.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Roelens P: Double-blind placebo-controlled study with topical 2% ketanserin ointment in the treatment of venous ulcers. Dermatologica 1989, 178:98–102.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Alvarez OM, Mertz PM, Eaglstein WH: The effect of occlusive dressings on collagen synthesis and re-epithelialization in superficial wounds. J Surg Res 1983, 35:142–148.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Ganio C, Tenewitz FE, Wilson RC, et al.: The treatment of chronic nonhealing wounds using autologous platelet-derived growth factors. J Foot Ankle Surg 1993, 32:263–268.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Falanga V, Margolis D, Alvarez O, et al.: Rapid healing of venous ulcers and lack of clinical rejection with an allogenic cultured human skin equivalent. Human Skin Equivalent Investigators Group. Arch Dermatol 1998, 134:283–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Carlin MC, Ratz JL: Treatment of telangiectasias: comparison of sclerosing agents. J Dermatol Surg Oncol 1987, 13:1181–1184.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Raju S, Owen S, Neglen P: The clinical impact of iliac venous stents in the management of chronic venous insufficiency. J Vas Surg 2002, 35:8–15. The advent of iliac venous stenting in patients with CVI provides an invaluable tool, which can be added to the armamentarium of treatment options available to appropriate candidates. With the use of intravascular ultrasound as an adjunctive modality and its improved sensitivity as compared with transfemoral contrast venography, it may potentially lower the threshold in identifying suitable patients with iliac venous obstruction that could benefit from this advanced technology.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Ruckley CV: Surgical Management of Venous Disease. London: Wolfe Medical Publications; 1988.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    De Palma RG: Surgical therapy for venous stasis: results of a modified Linton operation. Am J Surg 1979, 137:810–813.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Bergan JJ, Murray J, Greason K: Subfascial endoscopic perforator vein surgery: a preliminary report. Ann Vasc Surg 1996, 10:211–219.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Rhodes JM, Gloviczki P, Canton LG, et al.: Endoscopic perforator vein division with ablation of superficial reflux improves venous hemodynamics. J Vasc Surg 1998, 28:839–847.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Porter JM, Moneta GL: International consensus committee on chronic venous disease: reporting standards in venous disease: an update. J Vasc Surg 1995, 21:635–645.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Raju S: Valve reconstruction procedures for chronic venous insufficiency. Semin Vasc Surg 1988, 1:101.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Raju S: Axillary vein transfer for postphlebitic syndrome. In Atlas of Venous Surgery. Edited by Bergan JJ, Kistner RL. Philadelphia: W B Saunders; 1992:147–152.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Ferris ED, Kistner RL: Femoral vein reconstruction and the management of chronic venous insufficiency: a 14-year experience. Arch Surg 1982, 117:1571–1579.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Gruss JD: The saphenopopliteal bypass for chronic venous insufficiency (May-Husni operation). In Surgery of the Veins. Edited by Bergan JJ, Yao JST. Orlando, FL: Grune & Stratton; 1985:255–265.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Kistner RL: Autogenous iliofemoral bypass. In Atlas of Venous Surgery. Edited by Bergan JJ, Kistner RL. Philadelphia: W B Saunders; 1992:187–190.Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Gloviczki P, Pairolero PC, Cherry KJ, Hallett JW: Reconstruction of the vena cava and of its primary tributaries: a preliminary report. J Vasc Surg 1990, 11:373–381.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Current Science Inc 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Robert M. Schainfeld
    • 1
  1. 1.Division of Vascular MedicineSt. Elizabeth’s Medical CenterBostonUSA

Personalised recommendations