The Severity of Manifestations of the Post-Thrombotic Syndrome Following Different Variants of Conservative Treatment of Deep Vein Thrombosis in the Lower Extremities

Abstract

нозного русла нижних конечностей. В пожилом и старческом возрасте частота тромбоза глубоких вен (ТГВ) увеличивается в несколько раз и достигает 200 случаев на 100 000 человек в год. Легочную эмболию

MUFFIN-PTS trial, Micronized Purified Flavonoid Fraction for the Treatment of Post-Thrombotic Syndrome: protocol of a randomised controlled trial

“…44 In contrast, data on MPFF in patients with PTS are scarce but encouraging: two studies have assessed the clinical effectiveness of MPFF and both of them reported some improvement in PTS symptoms. 22 23 However, these studies were small or retrospective, published in Russian language and neither was an RCT. While two small older double-blind RCTs assessed the effectiveness of MPFF (Daflon) in PTS, they did not assess clinical endpoints and rather assessed changes in venous tone, capacity and outflow.…”

Micronized purified flavonoid fraction for the treatment of chronic venous insufficiency, with a focus on postthrombotic syndrome: A narrative review

“…Eight observational studies 28,49,52,53,54,56,100,101 totaling 9683 patients (excluding one observational study 100 ) and four RCTs 67,68,71,74 totaling 2687 patients showed improvement in QOL with MPFF in CVI. One observational study 81 and two RCTs 73,82 showed no significant impact of MPFF on QOL.…”

“…One observational study 59 and three RCTs 71,75,85 reported good compliance with MPFF. Five observational studies 52,53,59,61,81 and two RCTs 85,86 reported no side effects with MPFF use. Two RCTs 71,78 reported fewer adverse events with MPFF compared to placebo, and one RCT 77 reported similar tolerability of MPFF and placebo.…”

“…Thus, there is a need for welldesigned clinical trials studying MPFF, specifically in patients with PTS. While observational studies 30,53,55,63 as therapy in PTS, namely, in well-designed double-blind RCTs with clinical endpoints.…”

“…Only the abstract was available for 1 of 14 systematic reviews, 91 for 8 of 33 RCTs, 23,41,46,47,65,67,69,70,82 and for 7 of 19 observational studies, 30,53,57,60,62,64,100 with associated duplicate publications cited. Neither the abstract nor the full manuscript were available for 6 RCTs 25,33,44,79,80,99 (including the unpublished Saveliev RCT) and 1 observational study, 63 with their respective duplicate publications cited.…”