Is Nonmicronized Diosmin 600 mg as Effective as Micronized Diosmin 900 mg plus Hesperidin 100 mg on Chronic Venous Disease Symptoms? Results of a Noninferiority Study.
Journal
International journal of vascular medicine
ISSN: 2090-2824
Titre abrégé: Int J Vasc Med
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101542608
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2020
2020
Historique:
received:
15
01
2020
revised:
14
02
2020
accepted:
18
02
2020
entrez:
25
3
2020
pubmed:
25
3
2020
medline:
25
3
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Phlebotonics have beneficial effects on some symptoms related to chronic venous disease (CVD) of the lower limbs. The most commonly used one is diosmin, available in a pure semisynthetic form or as a micronized purified flavonoid fraction. 114 patients (mean age, 44.4 years; women, 90.4%) were randomized in the per-protocol analysis (D-group, Nonmicronized diosmin 600 mg was proven to have a noninferior efficacy compared to micronized diosmin 900 mg plus hesperidin 100 mg, associated with greater ease in swallowing the tablet.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Phlebotonics have beneficial effects on some symptoms related to chronic venous disease (CVD) of the lower limbs. The most commonly used one is diosmin, available in a pure semisynthetic form or as a micronized purified flavonoid fraction.
RESULTS
RESULTS
114 patients (mean age, 44.4 years; women, 90.4%) were randomized in the per-protocol analysis (D-group,
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Nonmicronized diosmin 600 mg was proven to have a noninferior efficacy compared to micronized diosmin 900 mg plus hesperidin 100 mg, associated with greater ease in swallowing the tablet.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32206351
doi: 10.1155/2020/4237204
pmc: PMC7081038
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
4237204Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2020 Marcio Steinbruch et al.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
I.B. and F.V. are employed by Laboratoire Innotech International. All other authors declare that there is no conflict of interest that could be perceived as prejudicing the impartiality of the research reported.
Références
Int J Mol Sci. 2018 Jun 05;19(6):
pubmed: 29874834
J Vasc Surg. 2004 Dec;40(6):1248-52
pubmed: 15622385
Phlebology. 2013 Sep;28(6):308-19
pubmed: 23395842
BMJ Open. 2016 Oct 7;6(10):e012594
pubmed: 27855102
Arzneimittelforschung. 1996 May;46(5):478-82
pubmed: 8737630
Circulation. 2014 Jul 22;130(4):333-46
pubmed: 25047584
Phlebology. 2011 Jun;26(4):162-8
pubmed: 21478142
Int Angiol. 1990 Apr-Jun;9(2):105-10
pubmed: 2254672
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014 Nov 20;(11):CD000011
pubmed: 25412402
Expert Opin Pharmacother. 2013 Dec;14(17):2343-9
pubmed: 24024752
Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2008 Mar;35(3):358-65
pubmed: 17962050
Neuron. 2015 Aug 5;87(3):474-91
pubmed: 26247858
Arzneimittelforschung. 2002;52(4):243-50
pubmed: 12040966
Korean J Pediatr. 2012 Nov;55(11):403-7
pubmed: 23227058
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Apr 06;4:CD003229
pubmed: 27048768
J Dtsch Dermatol Ges. 2017 May;15(5):538-556
pubmed: 28485865
J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord. 2015 Apr;3(2):219-27.e1-3
pubmed: 26993844
J Cardiovasc Pharmacol Ther. 2002 Jan;7 Suppl 1:S21-4
pubmed: 12011969
Phlebologie. 1993 Oct-Dec;46(4):721-31
pubmed: 8115491
Int Angiol. 2008 Feb;27(1):1-59
pubmed: 18277340
Z Kardiol. 1991;80 Suppl 7:95-101
pubmed: 1792820
Angiology. 2000 Jan;51(1):19-23
pubmed: 10667639