Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42551587›Full record

ReviewJournal of vascular surgery. Venous and lymphatic disorders2026

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

Sergiu-Ciprian Matei, Nadelin Nikolov, Miroslava Popović, Vasyl Shaprynskyi, Surat Temirov, Vassil Chervenkoff, Yoann Molinard, Julie Escola, Nenad Ilijevski

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of vascular surgery. Venous and lymphatic disorders, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Sergiu-Ciprian MateiAbdominal Surgery and Phlebology Research Center, Victor Babeş University of Medicine and Pharmacy Timişoara, Timişoara, Romania; 1'st Surgical Department, "Pius Brînzeu" County Emergency Clinical Hospital Timişoara, Timişoara, Romania. Electronic address: matei.sergiu@umft.ro.
Nadelin NikolovVascular Surgery Department, National Heart Hospital, Sofia, Bulgaria.
Miroslava PopovićVascular Surgery Department, CHC Zvezdara, Belgrade, Serbia.
Vasyl ShaprynskyiDepartment of Mini-invasive Surgery, State Institution of Science "Center of Innovative HTechnologies" State Administrative Department, Kyiv, Ukraine.
Surat TemirovVascular Surgery Department, Central Hospital Ministry of Internal Affairs Author Republic of Uzbekistan, Tashkent, Uzbekistan.
Vassil ChervenkoffVascular Surgery Department, Acibadem Citiy Clinic UMHAT Tokuda, Sofia, Bulgaria.
Yoann MolinardLaboratoire Innotech International, Groupe Innothera, Arcueil, France.
Julie EscolaLaboratoire Innotech International, Groupe Innothera, Arcueil, France.
Nenad IlijevskiVascular Surgery Department, School of Medicine Belgrade University, Dedinje Cardiovascular Institute, Belgrade, Serbia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Chronic venous disease and varicose veins (VVs) 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 chronic venous disease 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 Clinical, Etiologic, Anatomic, and Pathophysiologic 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.

Indexed as

Chronic venous diseaseCompression therapyDelphi-like methodEndovenous ablationEVLAExpert consensusRFAVaricose veinsVenoactive drugs

Identifiers

PMID42551587
PMCPMC13598173

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.