The 2020 update of the CEAP classification system and reporting standards.

The CEAP (Clinical-Etiology-Anatomy-Pathophysiology) classification is an internationally accepted standard for describing patients with chronic venous disorders and it has been used for reporting clinical research findings in scientific journals. Developed in 1993, updated in 1996, and revised in 2004, CEAP is a classification system based on clinical manifestations of chronic venous disorders, on current understanding of the etiology, the involved anatomy, and the underlying venous pathology. As the evidence related to these aspects of venous disorders, and specifically of chronic venous diseases (CVD, C2-C6) continue to develop, the CEAP classification needs periodic analysis and revisions. In May of 2017, the American Venous Forum created a CEAP Task Force and charged it to critically analyze the current classification system and recommend revisions, where needed. Guided by four basic principles (preservation of the reproducibility of CEAP, compatibility with prior versions, evidence-based, and practical for clinical use), the Task Force has adopted the revised Delphi process and made several changes. These changes include adding Corona phlebectatica as the C4c clinical subclass, introducing the modifier "r" for recurrent varicose veins and recurrent venous ulcers, and replacing numeric descriptions of the venous segments by their common abbreviations. This report describes all these revisions and the rationale for making these changes.

Scoring systems for the post-thrombotic syndrome.

OBJECTIVE: To assess each of the scoring systems used to diagnose and classify post-thrombotic syndrome, a common chronic complication of deep vein thrombosis. The design of the study was a systematic review of the literature pertaining to post-thrombotic syndrome. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines by a search of PubMed (1948 to September 2011) using the search terms "post-thrombotic syndrome," "postthrombotic syndrome," "post-phlebitic syndrome," and "postphlebitic syndrome." A manual reference list search was also carried out to identify further studies that would be appropriate for inclusion. The various scoring systems in use were identified and assessed against a list of criteria to determine their validity for use. For outcome measures, each scoring system was assessed for specific criteria, including interobserver reliability, association with ambulatory venous pressures, ability to assess severity of post-thrombotic syndrome, ability to assess change in condition over time, and association with patient-reported symptom severity. RESULTS: The Villalta, Ginsberg, Brandjes, Widmer, CEAP, and Venous Clinical Severity Score systems all were assessed for the stated outcome measures. From their use in the literature, only the Villalta score was able to fulfill all the criteria described. The main criticism of the Villalta score in the literature appears to be its use of subjective measures. To that end, we propose that use of a venous disease-specific quality-of-life questionnaire in combination with the Villalta score may help standardize the subjective criteria. CONCLUSIONS: The Villalta score, combined with a venous disease-specific quality-of-life questionnaire, should be considered the "gold standard" for the diagnosis and classification of post-thrombotic syndrome.

Updated terminology of chronic venous disorders: the VEIN-TERM transatlantic interdisciplinary consensus document.

Non-uniform terminology in the world's venous literature has continued to pose a significant hindrance to the dissemination of knowledge regarding the management of chronic venous disorders. This VEIN-TERM consensus document was developed by a transatlantic interdisciplinary faculty of experts under the auspices of the American Venous Forum (AVF), the European Venous Forum (EVF), the International Union of Phlebology (IUP), the American College of Phlebology (ACP), and the International Union of Angiology (IUA). It provides recommendations for fundamental venous terminology, focusing on terms that were identified as creating interpretive problems, with the intent of promoting the use of a common scientific language in the investigation and management of chronic venous disorders. The VEIN-TERM consensus document is intended to augment previous transatlantic/international interdisciplinary efforts in standardizing venous nomenclature which are referenced in this article.