Progression of varicose veins and chronic venous insufficiency in the general population in the Edinburgh Vein Study.

OBJECTIVE: The natural history in the general population of chronic venous disease in the legs is not well understood. This has limited our ability to predict which patients will deteriorate and to assign clinical priorities. The aims of this study were to describe the progression of trunk varicose veins and chronic venous insufficiency (CVI) in the general population, to identify important lifestyle and clinical prognostic factors, and to determine the relationship between venous reflux and progression. METHODS: The Edinburgh Vein Study is a population-based cohort study in which randomly selected adults aged 18 to 64 years had an examination at baseline. This included a questionnaire on lifestyle and clinical factors, standardized assessment and classification of venous disease in the legs, and duplex scan to detect venous reflux in eight segments of each leg. A follow-up examination 13 years later included a reclassification of venous disease to ascertain progression in the development or increase in severity of varicose veins and CVI. RESULTS: Among 1566 adults seen at baseline, 880 had a follow-up examination, of whom 334 had trunk varicose veins or CVI at baseline and composed the study sample. The mean (standard deviation) duration of follow-up was 13.4 (0.4) years. Progression was found in 193 (57.8%), equivalent to 4.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 3.7-4.9) annually. In 270 subjects with only varicose veins at baseline, 86 (31.9%) developed CVI, with the rate increasing consistently with age (P = .04). Almost all subjects (98%) with both varicose veins and CVI at baseline deteriorated. Progression of chronic venous disease did not differ by gender or leg, but a family history of varicose veins and history of deep venous thrombosis increased risk (odds ratio [OR], 1.85 [95% CI, 1.14-1.30] and 4.10 [95% CI, 1.07-15.71], respectively). Overweight was associated with increased risk of CVI in those with varicose veins (OR, 1.85; 95% CI, 1.10-3.12). Reflux in the superficial system increased the likelihood of progression, especially in combination with deep reflux (OR, 2.57; 95% CI, 1.55-4.25) and when located in the small saphenous vein (OR, 4.73; 95% CI, 1.37-16.39). CONCLUSIONS: Nearly half of the general population with chronic venous disease deteriorated during 13 years, and almost one third with varicose veins developed skin changes of CVI, increasing their risk of ulceration. Age, family history of varicose veins, history of deep venous thrombosis, overweight, and superficial reflux, especially in the small saphenous vein and with deep reflux, might influence the risk of progression.

Compression stockings for the initial treatment of varicose veins in patients without venous ulceration.

BACKGROUND: Compression hosiery or stockings are often the first line of treatment for varicose veins in people without either healed or active venous ulceration. Evidence is required to determine whether the use of compression stockings can effectively manage and treat varicose veins in the early stages. This is an update of a review first published in 2011. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of compression stockings for the only and initial treatment of varicose veins in patients without healed or active venous ulceration. SEARCH METHODS: For this update the Cochrane Peripheral Vascular Diseases Group Trials Search Co-ordinator searched the Specialised Register (last searched August 2013) and CENTRAL (2013, Issue 5). SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were included if they involved participants diagnosed with primary trunk varicose veins without healed or active venous ulceration (Clinical, Etiology, Anatomy, Pathophysiology (CEAP) classification C2 to C4). Included trials assessed compression stockings versus no treatment, compression versus placebo stockings, or compression stockings plus drug intervention versus drug intervention alone. Trials comparing different lengths and pressures of stockings were also included. Trials involving other types of treatment for varicose veins (either as a comparator to stockings or as an initial non-randomised treatment), including sclerotherapy and surgery, were excluded. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors assessed the trials for inclusion and quality (SS and LR). SS extracted the data, which were checked by LR. Attempts were made to contact trial authors where missing or unclear data were present. MAIN RESULTS: Seven studies involving 356 participants with varicose veins without healed or active venous ulceration were included. Different levels of pressure were exerted by the stockings in the studies, ranging from 10 to 50 mmHg. One study assessed compression hosiery versus no compression hosiery. The other six compared different types or pressures of stockings. The methodological quality of all included trials was unclear, mainly because of inadequate reporting.The symptoms subjectively improved with the wearing of stockings across trials that assessed this outcome, but these assessments were not made by comparing one randomised arm of a trial with a control arm and are therefore subject to bias.Meta-analyses were not undertaken due to inadequate reporting and actual or suspected high levels of heterogeneity. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is insufficient, high quality evidence to determine whether or not compression stockings are effective as the sole and initial treatment of varicose veins in people without healed or active venous ulceration, or whether any type of stocking is superior to any other type. Future research should consist of a large RCT of participants with trunk varices either wearing or not wearing compression stockings to assess the efficacy of this intervention. If compression stockings are found to be beneficial, further studies assessing which length and pressure is the most efficacious could then take place.

Incidence of chronic venous disease in the Edinburgh Vein Study.

BACKGROUND: Epidemiologic research in chronic venous disease has focused on prevalence and associated risk factors. Evidence on the risks and incidence that this condition will develop is limited. The aim of this study was to measure the incidence of new varicose veins and chronic venous insufficiency (CVI) in an adult population and to investigate risk factors associated with the development of these conditions. METHODS: The Edinburgh Vein Study is a cohort study of a random sample of the general population. Invitations were sent to 1456 men and women at baseline to participate in a 13-year follow-up examination. Each participant completed a questionnaire on lifestyle and medical history and underwent an examination that included clinical classification of venous disease. RESULTS: After a mean follow-up of 13.4 (standard deviation, 0.4) years, 880 of 1456 individuals participated (60.4% response). The overall incidence (95% confidence interval [CI]) of C2 varicose veins was 18.2% (15.2%-21.6%), giving an annual incidence rate of 1.4% (1.1%-1.7%), with incidence rates similar in men and women: the 13-year age-adjusted incidence of varicose veins was 15.2% (10.4%-20.0%) in men and 17.4% (13.1%-21.7%) in women (P = .97). The 13-year incidence of varicose veins increased consistently with age from 9.8% in those aged 18 to 34 years to 25.7% in those aged 55 to 64 years (P < .001). The 13-year incidence (95% CI) of CVI was 9.2% (7.0%-11.9%), and the annual incidence rate was 0.7% (0.5%-0.9%). The incidence of CVI was similar in men and women and increased consistently with age (P < .001). Participants with a family history of venous disease were more likely to develop C2 varicose veins (odds ratio, 1.75; 95% CI, 1.12-2.71). Obesity was associated with the development of CVI: the 13-year incidence (95% CI) was 6.1% (3.7%-9.6%) in those who were of normal weight and 23.6% (14.2%-37.0%) in obese participants, with an age-adjusted odds ratio of 3.58 (1.70-7.56). CONCLUSIONS: The Edinburgh Vein Study is one of a few cohort studies to report the incidence of varicose veins and CVI in the general population. The incidence of varicose veins and CVI did not differ significantly by sex and was strongly associated with increasing age. The risk of developing varicose veins was increased in those with a family history, and the risk of CVI was increased in those with higher body mass index.

Compression stockings for the initial treatment of varicose veins in patients without venous ulceration.

BACKGROUND: Compression hosiery or stockings are often the first line of treatment for varicose veins in people without either healed or active venous ulceration. Evidence is required to determine whether the use of compression stockings can effectively manage and treat varicose veins in the early stages. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of compression stockings for the initial treatment of varicose veins in patients without healed or active venous ulceration. SEARCH METHODS: The Cochrane Peripheral Vascular Disease Group searched their Specialised Register (last searched 31 May 2011) and CENTRAL (2011, Issue 2). In addition, the reference lists of relevant articles were searched. Authors of ongoing and current trials were contacted. There were no language restrictions. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were included if they involved participants diagnosed with primary trunk varicose veins without healed or active venous ulceration (Clinical, Etiology, Anatomy, Pathophysiology (CEAP) classification C2 to C4). Included trials assessed compression stockings versus no treatment, compression versus placebo stockings, or compression stockings + drug intervention versus drug intervention alone. Trials comparing different lengths and pressures of stockings were also included. Trials involving other types of treatment for varicose veins (either as a comparator to stockings or as an initial non-randomised treatment), including sclerotherapy and surgery, were excluded. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors assessed the trials for inclusion and quality (SS and LR). SS extracted the data, which were checked by LR. Attempts were made to contact trial authors where missing or unclear data were present. MAIN RESULTS: Seven studies involving 356 participants with varicose veins without healed or active venous ulceration were included. Different levels of pressure were exerted by the stockings in the studies, ranging from 10 to 50 mmHg. One study assessed compression hosiery versus no compression hosiery. The other six compared different types or pressures of stockings. The methodological quality of all included trials was unclear, mainly because of inadequate reporting.The symptoms subjectively improved with the wearing of stockings across trials that assessed this outcome, but these assessments were not made by comparing one randomised arm of a trial with a control arm and are therefore subject to bias.Meta-analyses were not undertaken due to inadequate reporting and actual or suspected high levels of heterogeneity. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is insufficient, high quality evidence to determine whether or not compression stockings are effective as the sole and initial treatment of varicose veins in people without healed or active venous ulceration, or whether any type of stocking is superior to any other type. Future research should consist of a large RCT of participants with trunk varices either wearing or not wearing compression stockings to assess the efficacy of this intervention. If compression stockings are found to be beneficial, further studies assessing which length and pressure is the most efficacious could then take place.