Stratification of pelvic venous reflux in patients with pelvic varicose veins.

OBJECTIVE: We investigated the association between the pattern and duration of pelvic venous reflux (PVR) and pelvic pain severity in patients with pelvic varicose veins (PVVs). METHODS: The present retrospective study included 600 female patients with PVVs. Of the 600 patients, 453 had had PVVs and pelvic congestion syndrome (group 1) and 147 had had an asymptomatic disease course (group 2). Pelvic venous pain (PVP) was assessed using a visual analog scale. All the patients had undergone duplex ultrasound of the left and right renal veins, external, internal, and common iliac veins, and parametrial, uterine, gonadal, and vulvar veins (PV, UV, GV, and VV, respectively), with an assessment of their patency and diameter and the presence and duration of reflux. Reflux in the pelvic veins was considered pathologic if it lasted for >1 second. RESULTS: In group 1, PVR type I (1-2 seconds), II (3-5 seconds), and III (>5 seconds or spontaneous reflux in the absence of a loading test) was found in 31%, 58%, and 11% of the patients, respectively. Moderate and severe reflux (types II and III) was associated with severe PVP (mean score, 8.3 ± 0.5) in 69% of the group 1 patients. A combination of reflux in the GV, PV, UV, and internal iliac vein was associated with severe PVP (mean score, 8.1 ± 0.3) in 51% of these patients. A combination of reflux in the PVs, UVs, and VVs was associated with moderate pain (mean score, 5.3 ± 0.2) in 49.2% of group 1. In group 2, PVR type I, II, and III was present in 95%, 4%, and 1% of the patients, respectively, and was observed in the PV only in patients with type I; in the GVs, PVs, UVs, and internal iliac veins in those with type II; and in the PVs and GVs in the patients with type III reflux. Reflux in the GVs and UVs was significantly more prevalent in group 1 than in group 2 (GVs, 51% vs 6%; P = .0001; UVs, 57% vs 7%; P = .0001). A combination of reflux in the GVs and UVs was a predictor of severe PVVs (odds ratio, 19.7; 95% confidence interval, 11.3-34.6). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with PVVs, the presence and severity of pelvic pain will be determined by the type of PVR and its distribution in the pelvic veins. The combination of moderate to severe reflux (types II and III) in the PVs, UVs, and GVs was a predictor of severe PVP. Patients with asymptomatic PVVs were characterized by mild reflux (type I) in the PVs, with rare involvement of the GVs and UVs.

Comparative analysis of the efficacy and safety of endovascular and endoscopic interventions on the gonadal veins in the treatment of pelvic congestion syndrome.

OBJECTIVE: Comparison of the efficacy and safety of endovascular and endoscopic interventions on the gonadal vein in the treatment of patients with pelvic congestion syndrome (PCS). METHODS: We evaluated the treatment outcomes in 95 patients with PCS who underwent endovascular embolization of gonadal veins (EEGV) (group 1, n = 67) or endoscopic resection of the gonadal veins (ERGV) (group 2; n = 28). A comparative analysis of the efficacy and safety of EEGV and ERGV in the treatment of PCS included assessments of their effects on pelvic venous pain, pelvic venous reflux, diameter of the pelvic veins, and restoration of daily activity, as well as treatment safety assessment. Clinical examinations and ultrasound studies of the pelvic veins were repeated at 1, 10, and 30 days, and 36 months after EEGV and ERGV. Pain was assessed using a visual analogue scale and the Von Korff questionnaire. RESULTS: A decrease in pelvic venous pain intensity was observed at 3.6 ± 1.4 days after EEGV and 2.5 ± 0.8 days after ERGV (P = .49 between the groups). At 1 month after the intervention, a complete relief of pelvic pain was reported by 52 and 25 patients in the EEGV and ERGV groups, respectively. The rates of valvular incompetence of the uterine veins were decreased from 85% in both groups at baseline to 3% in group 1 and 0% in group 2 at 36 months after the intervention, respectively. In the early postprocedural period, pain in the femoral or jugular vein puncture site was reported by eight patients (12%) who underwent EEGV (2.2 ± 0.7 scores). Postembolization syndrome was diagnosed in 13 patients (19.4%). After ERGV, all patients experienced pain in the area of the surgical wound, with a severity of 3.9 ± 0.5 scores. Hematoma at the puncture site of the main vein was observed in 6% of patients after EEGV. Protrusion of coils was identified in three patients (4.5%). The VTE incidence was four times greater in group 1 vs group 2 (14 vs 3 patients; P < .05). The relative risk of this complication after EEGV was 1.4 (95% confidence interval, 1.146-1.732). In two patients (7.1%) after the bilateral laparoscopic resection of the gonadal veins, an ileus developed. No complications of anesthesia were observed in either group. CONCLUSIONS: Endovascular and endoscopic techniques for decreasing blood flow through the gonadal veins are effective and safe in treating the PCS. The obvious advantages of EEGV are minimal injury and possibility to perform procedure under local anesthesia. The ERGV is associated with at least similar and, in some cases, even superior outcomes, in the terms of significantly (P < .05) shorter time to the postprocedural pain relief and avoiding postembolization syndrome.

Liquid Formulation of Gemcitabine Increases Venous Pain in Patients With Cancer: A Retrospective Study.

PURPOSE: Venous pain induced by peripheral intravenous infusion of gemcitabine has remained an unresolved issue in clinical practice. This study aimed to identify differences between gemcitabine formulations as well as risk factors associated with gemcitabine-induced venous pain in patients with cancer. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed data from consecutive patients with cancer who had received chemotherapy including a lyophilized or liquid formulation of gemcitabine diluted with 5% glucose solution via a peripheral vein. The study was conducted at Ehime University Hospital using electronic medical records dated between January 2015 and July 2017. The primary end point was the prevalence of venous pain at the administration site during gemcitabine infusion, classified as injection site reaction of grade ≥2 according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 4.0. A multivariate logistic regression analysis with generalized estimating equations for longitudinal data was used to identify risk factors for venous pain during all courses of gemcitabine treatment. FINDINGS: A total of 1150 treatment courses in 141 Japanese patients were evaluated in this study. Venous pain occurred in 115 courses (10.0%) and in 49 patients (34.8%). The multivariate logistic regression analysis with generalized estimating equations revealed that a dose increase of gemcitabine and use of the liquid formulation of gemcitabine were significantly associated with an increased risk for venous pain (dose increase, adjusted odds ratio [OR] = 1.25; 95% CI, 1.11-1.40 [P < 0.001]; and liquid formulation, adjusted OR = 12.43, 95% CI, 5.61-27.51 [P < 0.001]), whereas age, course number of gemcitabine, and use of the soft-back product of 5% glucose solution were significantly associated with a reduced risk for venous pain (age, adjusted OR = 0.75; 95% CI, 0.57-0.98 [P = 0.037]; course number, adjusted OR = 0.96; 95% CI, 0.92-0.99 [P = 0.023]; and soft back, adjusted OR = 0.39; 95% CI, 0.21-0.74 [P = 0.004]). IMPLICATIONS: The use of the liquid formulation of gemcitabine was associated with a significant increase in the frequency of gemcitabine-induced venous pain despite dilution with 5% glucose solution compared to that with the lyophilized formulation. The lyophilized formulation of gemcitabine should hence be used in peripheral intravenous infusion for the treatment of patients with cancer.

[Neurobiological aspects of venous pelvic pain]. / Neirobiologicheskie aspekty venoznoi tazovoi boli.

Mechanisms of the development of pain in chronic venous diseases (CVD), including pelvic congestion syndrome (PCS), are understudied. The existing hypotheses of the occurrence of venous pelvic pain (VVP) do not allow to answer the question why some patients have no pain syndrome while others have very pronounced pain despite the same morphofunctional changes in the pelvic veins. This review presents current hypotheses of the VPP development, data on some vasoactive neuropeptides (endothelin, calcitonin gene-related peptide, and substance P), their role in the modulation of vascular tone and sensation of pain, possible association between neurogenic inflammation and VPP and provides a rationale for studying the activity of these neurotransmitters in the treatment of PCS and pelvic pain.

Surgical aspects of venous pelvic pain treatment.

This review presents modern information on the anatomy of pelvic veins, mechanisms of development of pelvic congestion syndrome (PCS) and venous pelvic pain (VPP), methods for verifying the venous nature of pelvic pain, as well as opportunities of various surgical interventions on the gonadal veins in treatment of PCS and relief of its most severe symptom, VPP. A comparative analysis of resection and embolization treatment methods and their effects on VPP, as well as rates of postprocedural complications, was carried out. The issues of elimination of specific compression syndromes causing occurrence of VPP, by using open, endoscopic and endovascular techniques are addressed.

Risk factors for venous symptoms in Russian patients with chronic venous disease.

Objectives: The study aimed to investigate risk factors for venous symptoms in Russian patients with chronic venous disease (CVD).Methods: Data on 487 patients with CVD aged 18 years and more were extracted from the database of a cross-sectional population-based study on the prevalence of CVD in a rural settlement. Risk factors for venous symptoms were calculated by multiple regression analysis. The study is registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT03900234, 1 April 2019.Results: A total of 259 patients (53.2%) had venous symptoms. Female gender, hard labour (HRs 1.8 and 1.4, p < .01), age, family history of CVD and being employed (HRs 1.009, 1.3, 1.27, p < .05) are risk factors for development of symptoms. After calculating for different complaints separately, female gender was confirmed as a risk factor for all symptoms. Family history of CVD with HR 1.4 is a risk factor for heaviness (p < .01) and fatigue (p < 0.05). Employment predicts heaviness, sensation of swelling and night cramps - HRs 1.38, 1.7 and 1.9 respectively (p < .05). Hard labour is a risk factor for sensation of swelling with HR 2.1 (p < .05), pain and night cramps (HRs 2.2 and 4.4, p < .01). Prolonged standing is associated with sensation of swelling - HR 1.05 (p < .05). Superficial venous reflux is a predictor only for venous pain (HR 2.4, p < .01).Conclusions: This study presents independent risk factors for venous symptoms in CVD patients. It demonstrates that different symptoms are associated with different factors.

Preventive effect of pre-warming, hot compress, and pH adjustment in oxaliplatin-induced venous pain.

Background Venous pain induced by peripheral intravenous administration of oxaliplatin remains clinically unresolved. Objective The aim of this study was to determine the efficacy of comprehensive intervention care for venous pain in colorectal cancer patients receiving oxaliplatin. Setting A Japanese tertiary hospital. Method We treated all outpatients after April 2012 with comprehensive intervention care including pre-warming of the oxaliplatin solution, use of a hot compress, and pH adjustment by combination with dexamethasone. We retrospectively reviewed the electronic medical records from colorectal cancer patients who had received oxaliplatin via a peripheral vein between December 2009 and June 2014. Main outcome measures The primary endpoint of this study was the incidence of venous pain at the administration site during oxaliplatin infusion, according to injection site reaction grade ≥ 2. Results We evaluated 271 treatment courses in 59 patients. Venous pain occurred in 42 courses (15.5%) among 26 patients. Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that female gender and body mass index ≥ 25 kg/m2 were significantly associated with an increased risk of venous pain during all courses (adjusted odds ratio [OR]: 3.18, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.35-7.92; P < 0.01; and adjusted OR: 3.37, 95% CI 1.26-9.40; P = 0.02, respectively), whereas comprehensive intervention care were significantly associated with reduced risk of venous pain during all courses (adjusted OR: 0.10, 95% CI 0.02-0.44; P < 0.01). Conclusion Comprehensive intervention care is a clinical treatment option for oxaliplatin-induced peripheral venous pain in patients with colorectal cancer, especially females with obesity.

Effect of pH adjustment by mixing steroid for venous pain in colorectal cancer patients receiving oxaliplatin through peripheral vein: a multicenter randomized phase II study (APOLLO).

PURPOSE: The aim of this phase II clinical trial was to evaluate the preventive effect of dexamethasone mixing injection for venous pain in patients with colorectal cancer during chemotherapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients were randomized to receive a 2-h intravenous infusion of oxaliplatin 130 mg/m(2) on day 1 followed by capecitabine 1000 mg/m(2) (or S-1 40-60 mg/m(2)) twice daily on days 1 through 14 of every 3 weeks with or without dexamethasone 1.65 mg at the infusion on day 1. RESULTS: A total of 53 patients were enrolled. The analysis population consisted of 49 patients (arm A, with dexamethasone N = 24; arm B, without dexamethasone N = 25). The incidence of venous pain ≥grade 2 based on the CTCAE version 4.0 was 33.3 % in arm A and 56.0 % in arm B (relative risk 0.60; 95 % CI 0.31-1.16). The incidences based on the verbal rating scale for arms A and B were 50.0 and 64.0 %, respectively (relative risk 0.78; 95 % CI 0.48-1.28). CONCLUSION: The primary endpoint was not met in this preliminary study.