Asosiy kontentga oʻtish
Maqola

Optimising the management of venous disease: Expert consensus from a multinational panel of phlebology specialists

Sergiu-Ciprian MateiAbdominal Surgery and Phlebology Research Center, Victor Babeş University of Medicine and Pharmacy Timişoara, 300041, Romania; 1'st Surgical Department, "Pius Brînzeu" County Emergency Clinical Hospital Timişoara, 300723, Romania. Electronic address: [email protected]N NikolovVascular Surgery Department, National Heart Hospital, Sofia, BulgariaMiroslava PopovicVascular Surgery department, CHC Zvezdara, Belgrade, SerbiaV. O. ShaprynskyiDepartment of mini-invasive surgery, State institution of Science "Center of Innovative healthcare technologies" state administrative department, Kyiv, UkraineSurat TemirovVascular surgery department, Central Hospital Ministry of Internal Affairs Author Republic of Uzbekistan, Tashkent, UzbekistanV. ChervenkoffVascular Surgery Department, AcibademCitiy Clinic UMHAT Tokuda Sofia, BulgariaYoann MolinardLaboratoire Innotech International, Groupe Innothera, 22 Avenue Aristide Briand, Arcueil 94110, FranceJulie EscolaInfection et inflammationNenad IlijevskiVascular surgery department, School of Medicine Belgrade University, Dedinje Cardiovascular Institute, Belgrade, Serbia
2026en
ABI

Annotatsiya

Chronic venous disease (CVD) and varicose veins (VV) are highly prevalent yet remain inconsistently managed despite existing guidelines, with variability in treatment selection, patient stratification, and use of conservative therapies. This multinational initiative sought to establish expert consensus on key clinical questions in venous disease management. A Delphi-like process involved 38 phlebologists from 15 countries across Europe, North Africa, and Central Asia. Four thematic workshops addressed interventional and conservative approaches for both CVD and VV. Twenty predefined questions were discussed, and resulting statements were rated on a 5-point Likert scale, with consensus defined as ≥75% agreement. Of 34 proposed statements, 30 (88%) achieved consensus. The panel emphasized that treatment decisions should be driven primarily by symptoms and quality of life rather than anatomy alone. Endovenous procedures were supported for symptomatic disease, with endovenous laser ablation and radiofrequency ablation considered equivalent for VV. Diosmin-based venoactive drugs, often combined with compression, were endorsed across CEAP classes for symptom relief, although adherence to conservative therapy remains limited. This consensus provides practical guidance for individualized care and highlights unmet needs in risk stratification, adherence, and long-term comparative outcomes.

Hali tarjima qilinmagan

Identifikatorlar

Iqtiboslar va manbalar