-
BMJ Clinical Evidence Jan 2016Leg ulcers usually occur secondary to venous reflux or obstruction, but 20% of people with leg ulcers have arterial disease, with or without venous disorders. Between... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Leg ulcers usually occur secondary to venous reflux or obstruction, but 20% of people with leg ulcers have arterial disease, with or without venous disorders. Between 1.5 and 3.0 in 1000 people have active leg ulcers. Prevalence increases with age to about 20 in 1000 people aged over 80 years.
METHODS AND OUTCOMES
We conducted a systematic overview, aiming to answer the following clinical questions: What are the effects of treatments for venous leg ulcers? What are the effects of organisational interventions for venous leg ulcers? What are the effects of advice about self-help interventions in people receiving usual care for venous leg ulcers? What are the effects of interventions to prevent recurrence of venous leg ulcers? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to March 2014 (Clinical Evidence overviews are updated periodically; please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this overview).
RESULTS
At this update, searching of electronic databases retrieved 116 studies. After deduplication and removal of conference abstracts, 63 records were screened for inclusion in the overview. Appraisal of titles and abstracts led to the exclusion of 43 studies and the further review of 20 full publications. Of the 20 full articles evaluated, four systematic reviews were updated and four RCTs were added at this update. We performed a GRADE evaluation for 23 PICO combinations.
CONCLUSIONS
In this systematic overview, we categorised the efficacy for 13 interventions based on information about the effectiveness and safety of advice to elevate leg, advice to keep leg active, compression stockings for prevention of recurrence, compression bandages and stockings to treat venous leg ulcers, laser treatment (low level), leg ulcer clinics, pentoxifylline, skin grafting, superficial vein surgery for prevention of recurrence, superficial vein surgery to treat venous leg ulcers, therapeutic ultrasound, and topical negative pressure.
Topics: Compression Bandages; Humans; Laser Therapy; Leg Ulcer; Negative-Pressure Wound Therapy; Skin Transplantation; Stockings, Compression; Treatment Outcome; Ultrasonography; Varicose Ulcer; Wound Healing
PubMed: 26771825
DOI: No ID Found -
Journal of Plastic, Reconstructive &... Aug 2014Hypertrophic scars and keloids can be aesthetically displeasing and lead to severe psychosocial impairment. Many invasive and non-invasive options are available for the... (Review)
Review
Hypertrophic scars and keloids can be aesthetically displeasing and lead to severe psychosocial impairment. Many invasive and non-invasive options are available for the plastic (and any other) surgeon both to prevent and to treat abnormal scar formation. Recently, an updated set of practical evidence-based guidelines for the management of hypertrophic scars and keloids was developed by an international group of 24 experts from a wide range of specialities. An initial set of strategies to minimize the risk of scar formation is applicable to all types of scars and is indicated before, during and immediately after surgery. In addition to optimal surgical management, this includes measures to reduce skin tension, and to provide taping, hydration and ultraviolet (UV) protection of the early scar tissue. Silicone sheeting or gel is universally considered as the first-line prophylactic and treatment option for hypertrophic scars and keloids. The efficacy and safety of this gold-standard, non-invasive therapy has been demonstrated in many clinical studies. Other (more specialized) scar treatment options are available for high-risk patients and/or scars. Pressure garments may be indicated for more widespread scarring, especially after burns. At a later stage, more invasive or surgical procedures may be necessary for the correction of permanent unaesthetic scars and can be combined with adjuvant measures to achieve optimal outcomes. The choice of scar management measures for a particular patient should be based on the newly updated evidence-based recommendations taking individual patient and wound characteristics into consideration.
Topics: Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Cicatrix, Hypertrophic; Compression Bandages; Cryotherapy; Humans; Injections, Intralesional; Keloid; Laser Therapy; Postoperative Complications; Practice Guidelines as Topic; Silicones; Skin Transplantation; Tissue Expansion
PubMed: 24888226
DOI: 10.1016/j.bjps.2014.04.011 -
Lancet (London, England) Oct 2016Improvements in acute burn care have enabled patients to survive massive burns that would have once been fatal. Now up to 70% of patients develop hypertrophic scars... (Review)
Review
Improvements in acute burn care have enabled patients to survive massive burns that would have once been fatal. Now up to 70% of patients develop hypertrophic scars after burns. The functional and psychosocial sequelae remain a major rehabilitative challenge, decreasing quality of life and delaying reintegration into society. Approaches to optimise healing potential of burn wounds use targeted wound care and surgery to minimise the development of hypertrophic scarring. Such approaches often fail, and modulation of the established scar is continued although the optimal indication, timing, and combination of therapies have yet to be established. The need for novel treatments is paramount, and future efforts to improve outcomes and quality of life should include optimisation of wound healing to attenuate or prevent hypertrophic scarring, well-designed trials to confirm treatment efficacy, and further elucidation of molecular mechanisms to allow development of new preventive and therapeutic strategies.
Topics: Administration, Cutaneous; Animals; Burns; Cicatrix, Hypertrophic; Compression Bandages; Dermatologic Agents; Disease Models, Animal; Humans; Laser Therapy; Patient Satisfaction; Phototherapy; Pruritus; Quality of Life; Skin Transplantation; Surgical Mesh; Transplantation, Autologous; Transplantation, Homologous; Treatment Outcome; Visual Analog Scale; Wound Healing
PubMed: 27707499
DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)31406-4 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Nov 2012Up to one percent of people in industrialised countries will suffer from a leg ulcer at some time. The majority of these leg ulcers are due to problems in the veins,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Up to one percent of people in industrialised countries will suffer from a leg ulcer at some time. The majority of these leg ulcers are due to problems in the veins, resulting in an accumulation of blood in the legs. Leg ulcers arising from venous problems are called venous (or varicose or stasis) ulcers. The main treatment is the application of a firm compression garment (bandage or stocking) in order to aid venous return. There is a large number of compression garments available and it was unclear whether they are effective in treating venous ulcers and, if so, which method of compression is the most effective.
OBJECTIVES
To undertake a systematic review of all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the effects on venous ulcer healing of compression bandages and stockings.Specific questions addressed by the review are:1. Does the application of compression bandages or stockings aid venous ulcer healing? 2. Which compression bandage or stocking system is the most effective?
SEARCH METHODS
For this second update we searched: the Cochrane Wounds Group Specialised Register (31 May 2012); the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library Issue 5, 2012); Ovid MEDLINE (1950 to May Week 4 2012); Ovid MEDLINE (In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations 30 May 2012); Ovid EMBASE (1980 to 2012 Week 21); and EBSCO CINAHL (1982 to 30 May 2012). No date or language restrictions were applied.
SELECTION CRITERIA
RCTs recruiting people with venous leg ulceration that evaluated any type of compression bandage system or compression stockings were eligible for inclusion. Eligible comparators included no compression (e.g. primary dressing alone, non-compressive bandage) or an alternative type of compression. RCTs had to report an objective measure of ulcer healing in order to be included (primary outcome for the review). SECONDARY OUTCOMES of the review included ulcer recurrence, costs, quality of life, pain, adverse events and withdrawals. There was no restriction on date, language or publication status of RCTs.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Details of eligible studies were extracted and summarised using a data extraction table. Data extraction was performed by one review author and verified independently by a second review author.
MAIN RESULTS
Forty-eight RCTs reporting 59 comparisons were included (4321 participants in total). Most RCTs were small, and most were at unclear or high risk of bias. Duration of follow-up varied across RCTs. Risk ratio (RR) and other estimates are shown below where RCTs were pooled; otherwise findings refer to a single RCT.There was evidence from eight RCTs (unpooled) that healing outcomes (including time to healing) are better when patients receive compression compared with no compression.Single-component compression bandage systems are less effective than multi-component compression for complete healing at six months (one large RCT).A two-component system containing an elastic bandage healed more ulcers at one year than one without an elastic component (one small RCT).Three-component systems containing an elastic component healed more ulcers than those without elastic at three to four months (two RCTs pooled), RR 1.83 (95% CI 1.26 to 2.67), but another RCT showed no difference between groups at six months.An individual patient data meta-analysis of five RCTs suggested significantly faster healing with the four-layer bandage (4LB) than the short stretch bandage (SSB): median days to healing estimated at 90 and 99 respectively; hazard ratio 1.31 (95% CI 1.09 to 1.58).High-compression stockings are associated with better healing outcomes than SSB at two to four months: RR 1.62 (95% CI 1.26 to 2.10), estimate from four pooled RCTs.One RCT suggested better healing outcomes at 16 months with the addition of a tubular device plus single elastic bandage to a base system of gauze and crepe bandages when compared with two added elastic bandages. Another RCT had three arms; when one or two elastic bandages were added to a base three-component system that included an outer tubular layer, healing outcomes were better at six months for the two groups receiving elastic bandages.There is currently no evidence of a statistically significant difference for the following comparisons:⋅alternative single-component compression bandages (two RCTs, unpooled);⋅two-component bandages compared with the 4LB at three months (three RCTs pooled);⋅alternative versions of the 4LB for complete healing at times up to and including six months (three RCTs, unpooled);⋅4LB compared with paste bandage for complete healing at three months (two RCTs, pooled), six months or one year (one RCT for each time point);⋅adjustable compression boots compared with paste bandages for the outcome of change in ulcer area at three months (one small RCT);⋅adjustable compression boots compared with the 4LB with respect to complete healing at three months (one small RCT);⋅single-layer compression stocking compared with paste bandages for outcome of complete healing at four months (one small RCT) and 18 months (another small RCT);⋅low compression stocking compared with SSB for complete healing at three and six months (one small RCT);⋅compression stockings compared with a two-component bandage system and the 4LB for the outcome of complete healing at three months (one small, three-armed RCT); and,⋅tubular compression compared with SSB (one small RCT) for complete healing at three months.
SECONDARY OUTCOMES
4LB was more cost-effective than SSB. It was not possible to draw firm conclusions regarding other secondary outcomes including recurrence, adverse events and health-related quality of life.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Compression increases ulcer healing rates compared with no compression. Multi-component systems are more effective than single-component systems. Multi-component systems containing an elastic bandage appear to be more effective than those composed mainly of inelastic constituents. Two-component bandage systems appear to perform as well as the 4LB. Patients receiving the 4LB heal faster than those allocated the SSB. More patients heal on high-compression stocking systems than with the SSB. Further data are required before the difference between high-compression stockings and the 4LB can be established.
Topics: Bandages; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Stockings, Compression; Varicose Ulcer; Wound Healing
PubMed: 23152202
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD000265.pub3 -
Archives of Physical Medicine and... Feb 2016To evaluate the effects of exercise on cancer-related lymphedema and related symptoms, and to determine the need for those with lymphedema to wear compression during... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the effects of exercise on cancer-related lymphedema and related symptoms, and to determine the need for those with lymphedema to wear compression during exercise.
DATA SOURCES
CINAHL, Cochrane, EBSCOhost, MEDLINE, PubMed, ProQuest Health and Medical Complete, ProQuest Nursing and Allied Health Source, ScienceDirect, and SPORTDiscus databases were searched for trials published before January 1, 2015.
STUDY SELECTION
Randomized and nonrandomized controlled trials and single-group pre-post studies published in English were included. Twenty-one (exercise) and 4 (compression and exercise) studies met inclusion criteria.
DATA EXTRACTION
Data were extracted into tabular format using predefined data fields by 1 reviewer and assessed for accuracy by a second reviewer. Study quality was evaluated using the Effective Public Health Practice Project Quality Assessment Tool.
DATA SYNTHESIS
Data were pooled using a random-effects model to assess the effects of acute and long-term exercise on lymphedema and lymphedema-associated symptoms, with subgroup analyses for exercise mode and intervention length. There was no effect of exercise (acute or intervention) on lymphedema or associated symptoms, with standardized mean differences from all analyses ranging between -0.2 and 0.1 (P values ≥.22). Findings from subgroup analyses for exercise mode (aerobic, resistance, mixed, other) and intervention duration (>12wk or ≤12wk) were consistent with these findings-that is, no effect on lymphedema or associated symptoms. There were too few studies evaluating the effect of compression during regular exercise to conduct a meta-analysis.
CONCLUSIONS
Individuals with secondary lymphedema can safely participate in progressive, regular exercise without experiencing a worsening of lymphedema or related symptoms. However, there is insufficient evidence to support or refute the current clinical recommendation to wear compression garments during regular exercise.
Topics: Compression Bandages; Exercise; Humans; Lymphedema; Neoplasms
PubMed: 26440777
DOI: 10.1016/j.apmr.2015.09.012 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2013Trauma is a leading causes of death and disability in young people. Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a principal cause of death. Trauma patients are at high risk of deep... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Trauma is a leading causes of death and disability in young people. Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a principal cause of death. Trauma patients are at high risk of deep vein thrombosis (DVT). The incidence varies according to the method used to measure the DVT and the location of the thrombosis. Due to prolonged rest and coagulation abnormalities, trauma patients are at increased risk of thrombus formation. Thromboprohylaxis, either mechanical or pharmacological, may decrease mortality and morbidity in trauma patients who survive beyond the first day in hospital, by decreasing the risk of VTE in this population.A previous systematic review did not find evidence of effectiveness for either pharmacological or mechanical interventions. However, this systematic review was conducted 10 years ago and most of the included studies were of poor quality. Since then new trials have been conducted. Although current guidelines recommend the use of thromboprophylaxis in trauma patients, there has not been a comprehensive and updated systematic review since the one published.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of thromboprophylaxis in trauma patients on mortality and incidence of deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism. To compare the effects of different thromboprophylaxis interventions and their effects according to the type of trauma.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched The Cochrane Injuries Group Specialised Register (searched April 30 2009), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials 2009, issue 2 (The Cochrane Library), MEDLINE (Ovid) 1950 to April (week 3) 2009, EMBASE (Ovid) 1980 to (week 17) April 2009, PubMed (searched 29 April 2009), ISI Web of Science: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED) (1970 to April 2009), ISI Web of Science: Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Science (CPCI-S) (1990 to April 2009).
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomized controlled clinical trials involving people of any age with major trauma defined by one or more of the following criteria: physiological: penetrating or blunt trauma with more than two organs and unstable vital signs, anatomical: people with an Injury Severity Score (ISS) higher than 9, mechanism: people who are involved in a 'high energy' event with a risk for severe injury despite stable or normal vital signs. We excluded trials that only recruited outpatients, trials that recruited people with hip fractures only, or people with acute spinal injuries.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Four authors, in pairs (LB and CM, EF and RC), independently examined the titles and the abstracts, extracted data, assessed the risk of bias of the trials and analysed the data. PP resolved any disagreement between the authors.
MAIN RESULTS
Sixteen studies were included (n=3005). Four trials compared the effect of any type (mechanical and/or pharmacological) of prophylaxis versus no prophylaxis. Prophylaxis reduced the risk of DVT in people with trauma (RR 0.52; 95% CI 0.32 to 0.84). Mechanical prophylaxis reduced the risk of DVT (RR = 0.43; 95% CI 0.25 to 0.73). Pharmacological prophylaxis was more effective than mechanical methods at reducing the risk of DVT (RR 0.48; 95% CI 0.25 to 0.95). LMWH appeared to reduce the risk of DVT compared to UH (RR 0.68; 95% CI 0.50 to 0.94). People who received both mechanical and pharmacological prophylaxis had a lower risk of DVT (RR 0.34; 95% CI 0.19 to 0.60)
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We did not find evidence that thromboprophylaxis reduces mortality or PE in any of the comparisons assessed. However, we found some evidence that thromboprophylaxis prevents DVT. Although the strength of the evidence was not high, taking into account existing information from other related conditions such as surgery, we recommend the use of any DVT prophylactic method for people with severe trauma.
Topics: Anticoagulants; Compression Bandages; Heparin, Low-Molecular-Weight; Humans; Pulmonary Embolism; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Venous Thromboembolism; Venous Thrombosis; Wounds and Injuries
PubMed: 23543562
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008303.pub2 -
Phlebology Apr 2018Objective Medical compression stockings are a standard, non-invasive treatment option for all venous and lymphatic diseases. The aim of this consensus document is to... (Review)
Review
Objective Medical compression stockings are a standard, non-invasive treatment option for all venous and lymphatic diseases. The aim of this consensus document is to provide up-to-date recommendations and evidence grading on the indications for treatment, based on evidence accumulated during the past decade, under the auspices of the International Compression Club. Methods A systematic literature review was conducted and, using PRISMA guidelines, 51 relevant publications were selected for an evidence-based analysis of an initial 2407 unrefined results. Key search terms included: 'acute', CEAP', 'chronic', 'compression stockings', 'compression therapy', 'lymph', 'lymphatic disease', 'vein' and 'venous disease'. Evidence extracted from the publications was graded initially by the panel members individually and then refined at the consensus meeting. Results Based on the current evidence, 25 recommendations for chronic and acute venous disorders were made. Of these, 24 recommendations were graded as: Grade 1A (n = 4), 1B (n = 13), 1C (n = 2), 2B (n = 4) and 2C (n = 1). The panel members found moderately robust evidence for medical compression stockings in patients with venous symptoms and prevention and treatment of venous oedema. Robust evidence was found for prevention and treatment of venous leg ulcers. Recommendations for stocking-use after great saphenous vein interventions were limited to the first post-interventional week. No randomised clinical trials are available that document a prophylactic effect of medical compression stockings on the progression of chronic venous disease (CVD). In acute deep vein thrombosis, immediate compression is recommended to reduce pain and swelling. Despite conflicting results from a recent study to prevent post-thrombotic syndrome, medical compression stockings are still recommended. In thromboprophylaxis, the role of stockings in addition to anticoagulation is limited. For the maintenance phase of lymphoedema management, compression stockings are the most important intervention. Conclusion The beneficial value of applying compression stockings in the treatment of venous and lymphatic disease is supported by this document, with 19/25 recommendations rated as Grade 1 evidence. For recommendations rated with Grade 2 level of evidence, further studies are needed.
Topics: Clinical Trials as Topic; Consensus; Humans; Lymphatic Diseases; Postthrombotic Syndrome; Practice Guidelines as Topic; Stockings, Compression
PubMed: 28549402
DOI: 10.1177/0268355516689631 -
Advances in Clinical and Experimental... Jun 2019Epidemiological data regarding venous leg ulcers, specifically low healing rates and frequent recurrences (occurring in 20-70% of the cases), seems surprising regarding... (Review)
Review
Epidemiological data regarding venous leg ulcers, specifically low healing rates and frequent recurrences (occurring in 20-70% of the cases), seems surprising regarding recent progress in the management of this complication. The aim of this review is to present the current state of knowledge on venous leg ulcer management, especially compression therapy. Treatment of venous ulcers should be comprehensive and wellorganized, based on modern standards and up-to-date, and should involve elaborated treatment strategies. A thorough diagnostic process followed by adequate treatment may result in marked improvement of the outcomes, with up to 67% healing rate at 12 weeks and up to 81% within 24 weeks. Continuation of therapeutic activities after the ulceration has been healed is reflected by a marked decrease in the recurrence rates, down to 16% whenever the patient is actively involved in the therapeutic process. Furthermore, early diagnosis and appropriate causal treatment may prevent progression of the illness.
Topics: Compression Bandages; Disease Progression; Humans; Recurrence; Stockings, Compression; Varicose Ulcer; Wound Healing
PubMed: 30085435
DOI: 10.17219/acem/78768 -
Phlebology Aug 2020Medical compression therapy is used for non-invasive treatment of venous and lymphatic diseases. Medical compression therapy-associated adverse events and...
OBJECTIVES
Medical compression therapy is used for non-invasive treatment of venous and lymphatic diseases. Medical compression therapy-associated adverse events and contraindications have been reported, although some contraindications are theoretically based. This consensus statement provides recommendations on medical compression therapy risks and contraindications.
METHODS
A systematic literature search of medical compression therapy publications reporting adverse events up until November 2017 was performed. A consensus panel comprising 15 international experts critically reviewed the publications and formulated the recommendations.
RESULTS
Sixty-two publications reporting medical compression therapy adverse events were identified. The consensus panel issued 21 recommendations on medical compression therapy contraindications and adverse event risk mitigation, in addition to reviewing medical compression therapy use in borderline indications. The most frequently reported non-severe medical compression therapy-associated adverse events included skin irritation, discomfort and pain. Very rare but severe adverse events, including soft tissue and nerve injury, were also identified.
CONCLUSION
This consensus statement summarises published medical compression therapy-associated adverse events and contraindications, and provides guidance on medical compression therapy. Severe medical compression therapy-associated adverse events are very rarely encountered if compression is used correctly and contraindications are considered.
Topics: Compression Bandages; Consensus; Contraindications; Humans; Lymphatic Diseases
PubMed: 32122269
DOI: 10.1177/0268355520909066 -
International Wound Journal Feb 2023This meta-review aimed to appraise and synthesise findings from existing systematic reviews that measured the impact of compression therapy on venous leg ulcers healing.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
This meta-review aimed to appraise and synthesise findings from existing systematic reviews that measured the impact of compression therapy on venous leg ulcers healing. We searched five databases to identify potential papers; three authors extracted data, and a fourth author adjudicated the findings. The AMSTAR-2 tool was used for quality appraisal and the certainty of the evidence was appraised using GRADEpro. Data analysis was undertaken using RevMan. We identified 12 systematic reviews published between 1997 and 2021. AMSTAR-2 assessment identified three as high quality, five as moderate quality, and four as low quality. Seven comparisons were reported, with a meta-analysis undertaken for five of these comparisons: compression vs no compression (risk ratio [RR]: 1.55; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.34-1.78; P < .00001; moderate-certainty evidence); elastic compression vs inelastic compression (RR: 1.02; 95% CI: 0.96-1.08; P < .61 moderate-certainty evidence); four layer vs
bandage systems (RR: 1.07; 95% CI: 0.82-1.40; P < .63; moderate-certainty evidence); comparison between different four-layer bandage systems (RR: 1.08; 95% CI: 0.93-1.25; P = .34; moderate-certainty evidence); compression bandage vs compression stocking (RR 0.95; 95% CI 0.87-1.03; P = .18; moderate-certainty evidence). The main conclusion from this review is that there is a statistically significant difference in healing rates when compression is used compared with no compression, with moderate-certainty evidence. Otherwise, there is no statistically different difference in healing rates using elastic compression vs inelastic compression, four layer vs bandage systems, different four-layer bandage systems, or compression bandages vs compression stockings. Topics: Humans; Compression Bandages; Varicose Ulcer; Stockings, Compression; Wound Healing; Data Analysis; Leg Ulcer
PubMed: 35855678
DOI: 10.1111/iwj.13891