ArticleJournal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions2025
SCAI Technical Review on Management of Chronic Venous Disease.
Article in Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Endovascular Iliac Vein Revascularization Versus Conservative Management for Chronic, Symptomatic Iliac Vein Obstruction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Cardiovascular and interventional radiology · 2026Review
- Predictive value of great and small saphenous vein diameters for venous reflux in lower extremity chronic venous insufficiency: A segmental analysis using duplex ultrasonography.Journal of ultrasound · 2026Article
- Impact of NR4A3 on wound healing in chronic venous ulcers and its association with the PI3K/Akt signaling pathway.Frontiers in physiology · 2026Article
- Charting the Course and Uncharted Territories: SCAI 2025 Guidelines for Chronic Venous Disease.Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions · 2025Article
- 2025 SCAI Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Management of Chronic Venous Disease: This statement was endorsed by the Society for Vascular Medicine (SVM).Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Chronic venous disease (CVD) impacts more than 25 million adults in the United States and is associated with a host of symptoms that can adversely affect quality of life (QoL), such as leg discomfort, edema, and ulceration. Treatments for CVD range from conservative therapy centered around use of compression to more invasive approaches, such as ablation, sclerotherapy, phlebectomy, venoplasty, and stenting. Methods: A systematic review was conducted to address 8 questions on the management of CVD that were formulated by the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions (SCAI) Guideline Panel using the patient, intervention, comparator, outcome (PICO) format. Medical literature from January 1, 2008, through May 15, 2023, was searched using PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, except where an existing systematic review on compression therapy versus no intervention was updated with evidence from May 1, 2020, to May 15, 2023. Study selection was performed in duplicate; data extraction and risk of bias assessment were performed by 1 reviewer and reviewed by a second reviewer. Pooled effect estimates were calculated when applicable, and overall certainty in the evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Results: Our combined searches identified 3648 titles and abstracts, of which 19 met eligibility criteria and informed the technical review. Studies reported on healing rate and time to healing, disease recurrence, symptom severity, and QoL among patients who were treated with compression therapy, ablation, sclerotherapy, phlebectomy, and venoplasty or stenting. Compression therapy probably results in slightly faster and more complete venous ulcer healing compared with no compression. Ablation of the great saphenous vein ± small saphenous vein may improve healing rate and symptoms over conservative therapy alone, particularly for ulcer disease. Evidence is very uncertain for any effect on healing rate, symptom score, QoL, and disease recurrence associated with perforator vein ablation, venoplasty, and stenting for iliocaval obstruction, sclerotherapy, and phlebectomy of symptomatic varicose veins. Conclusions: Data from this technical review will inform the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions Guideline on Management of Chronic Venous Disease. The panel also identified research priorities based on areas where evidence to guide clinical practice is lacking or very uncertain.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.