A Comparative Study of a Small Series of Patients (50 Patients) with Pelvic Varicose Veins Treated with Plugs Alone or Plugs and Polidocanol.
congestion pelvic syndrome
embolization treatment
Journal
Journal of clinical medicine
ISSN: 2077-0383
Titre abrégé: J Clin Med
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101606588
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
20 Aug 2023
20 Aug 2023
Historique:
received:
14
07
2023
revised:
11
08
2023
accepted:
17
08
2023
medline:
26
8
2023
pubmed:
26
8
2023
entrez:
26
8
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Level 2. To compare the safety and efficacy of vascular plug (VP) and vascular plug and polidocanol foam (VPPF) treatments for embolization in pelvic congestion syndrome (PCS). A comparative, prospective, two-center study enrolled 50 women with PCS from January 2019 to January 2020. The patients were divided into two groups, and embolization was performed with VP (n = 25) and VPPF (n = 25) treatments. The mean age of the patients was 45.6 years ± 6.9. Three clinical parameters were assessed: abdominal pain, dyspareunia, and lower limb pain. The primary outcome (clinical success at 1 yr using a VAS), number of devices, procedure and fluoroscopy times, radiation doses, costs, and complications were compared. The participants were followed-up at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months. At the 1-year follow-up, clinical success did not significantly differ between the two groups (VP vs. VPPF) regarding the improvement of the symptoms analyzed (pelvic pain, dyspareunia, lower extremity pain, and other symptoms ( Embolization for PCS resulted in pain relief in 90% of patients; the use of polidocanol did not demonstrate changes in the clinical outcome. The use of a VP alone was associated with decreased fluoroscopy time and radiation dose.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37629450
pii: jcm12165408
doi: 10.3390/jcm12165408
pmc: PMC10455180
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Références
Hum Reprod. 2001 May;16(5):931-9
pubmed: 11331640
Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2022 Jan;63(1):163-164
pubmed: 34776297
J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2000 Jul-Aug;11(7):859-64
pubmed: 10928522
Phlebology. 2012 Mar;27 Suppl 1:65-73
pubmed: 22312070
Front Cardiovasc Med. 2021 Nov 17;8:751178
pubmed: 34869656
J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2017 Oct;28(10):1432-1437.e3
pubmed: 28757285
J Vasc Surg Cases Innov Tech. 2019 Jun 25;5(3):252-254
pubmed: 31304434
Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2015 Aug;38(4):806-20
pubmed: 25804635
Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2014 Oct;37(5):1259-67
pubmed: 24190634
Phlebology. 2015 Mar;30(1 Suppl):73-80
pubmed: 25729071
J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2020 Oct;31(10):1560-1569
pubmed: 32855049
Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2007 Jul-Aug;30(4):655-61
pubmed: 17468903
J Clin Med. 2021 Apr 09;10(8):
pubmed: 33918908
Eur Radiol. 2022 Jul;32(7):4679-4686
pubmed: 35137302
J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2019 Jun;30(6):781-789
pubmed: 30857986
Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 1997 Mar-Apr;20(2):107-11
pubmed: 9030500
J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2006 Feb;17(2 Pt 1):289-97
pubmed: 16517774
Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2007 Nov-Dec;30(6):1105-11
pubmed: 17805925
J Vasc Surg. 2011 May;53(5 Suppl):2S-48S
pubmed: 21536172
J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord. 2016 Jul;4(3):355-70
pubmed: 27318059
J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2016 Oct;27(10):1478-1486.e8
pubmed: 27397619
Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2008 Nov-Dec;31(6):1159-64
pubmed: 18756371
Int J Clin Pract. 2005 Oct;59(10):1195-203
pubmed: 16178988
J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2018 Jan;29(1):45-53
pubmed: 29174618
J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2002 Feb;13(2 Pt 1):171-8
pubmed: 11830623
Diagn Interv Imaging. 2017 Dec;98(12):843-848
pubmed: 28647478
J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc. 2003 Nov;10(4):501-4
pubmed: 14738638
Pain Physician. 2014 Mar-Apr;17(2):E141-7
pubmed: 24658485