Demetres, Michelle

Background This review evaluates the current evidence for the role of venoactive drugs (VADs) for venous origin chronic pelvic pain (VO-CPP) and provide insights to inform the design of an ideal randomized controlled trial (RCT) for future research. Methods A search was performed in the following databases: Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Scopus. Studies retrieved were screened for eligibility using Covidence software following PRISMA reviews’ methodology. The quality of RCTs and cross-over RCTs was assessed using the Cochrane review tools. Studies were reviewed by 3 physicians, with discrepancies resolved by consensus. A narrative review of the studies was conducted to identify and synthesize clinical outcomes and safety profile of VADs. Results Eleven studies (n = 748) were identified: 3 RCTs and 8 open-label prospective studies. Most participants were reproductive-age women with confirmed VO-CPP, diagnosed via imaging or laparoscopy. Micronized Purified Flavonoid Fraction (MPFF) was the most studied VAD. Pain assessment with VAS scores was the primary endpoint in all studies, with significant benefit in patients consistently demonstrated. Other endpoints included Pelvic Venous Clinical Severity Score (PVCSS) and Pelvic Varicose Vein Questionnaire (PVVQ), with improved symptoms and quality of life. Quantitative outcomes were also reported (reduced pelvic vein diameter; better venous hemodynamics). MPFF was safe, with few adverse events reported. Three RCTs had methodological limitations, with two judged high-risk for bias. Conclusions While many identified studies appear to be of low quality, the consistent beneficial effect on VO-CPP scores and the safety profile observed across all reviewed studies suggest that flavonoids have a positive role in the conservative management of pelvic venous disease (PeVD). Future well-designed RCTs are needed to confirm these findings. In the meantime, flavonoids should be considered a therapeutic option for symptomatic patients with PeVD who are not qualified for, not wishing, or are awaiting intervention.

Background Differences in quality of life (QoL) after coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) compared with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are not well characterized. We aimed to compare the short‐ and long‐term effects of CABG versus PCI on QoL. Methods and Results We performed a systematic review and meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing CABG versus PCI using the Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ)‐Angina Frequency, SAQ‐QoL, SAQ‐Physical Limitations, EuroQoL‐5D, and Short‐Form Questionnaire. We calculated mean changes within each group from baseline to 1, 6, 12, and 36 to 60 months (latest follow‐up) and the weighted mean differences between groups using inverse‐variance methods. A total of 10 760 patients were enrolled in 5 trials. From baseline to 12 months and 36 to 60 months, the mean change in SAQ‐Angina Frequency was >22 points (95% CI, 21.0–25.6) after both PCI and CABG. The mean difference in SAQ‐Angina Frequency was similar between procedures at 1 month and at 36 to 60 months but favored CABG at 12 months (1.97 [95% CI, 0.68–3.26]). SAQ‐QoL favored PCI at 1 month (−2.92 [95% CI, −4.66 to −1.18]) and CABG at 6 (2.50 [95% CI, 1.02–3.97]), 12 (3.30 [95% CI, 1.78–4.82]), and 36 to 60 months (3.17 [95% CI, 0.54 5.80). SAQ‐Physical Limitations (−12.61 [95% CI, −16.16 to −9.06]) and EuroQoL‐5D (−0.07 [95% CI, −0.08 to −0.07) favored PCI at 1 month. Short‐Form Questionnaire‐Physical Component favored CABG at 12 months (1.18 [95% CI, 0.46–1.90]). Conclusions Both PCI and CABG improved long‐term disease‐specific and generic QoL.