Horse chestnut seed extract for chronic venous insufficiency
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Conservative therapy of chronic venous insufficiency (CVI) consists largely of compression treatment. However, this often causes discomfort and has been associated with poor compliance. Therefore, oral drug treatment is an attractive alternative. OBJECTIVES: To review the evidence from rigorous clinical trials assessing the efficacy and safety of oral horse chestnut seed extract (HCSE) versus placebo, or other treatments for CVI. SEARCH STRATEGY: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of HCSE for chronic venous insufficiency were sought through EMBASE (inception to December 2001), MEDLINE and AMED (from inception to February 2004), The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library, Issue 1, 2004), the Specialised Trials Register of the Cochrane Peripheral Vascular Diseases Group (last searched February 2004), and Phytobase (from inception to January 2001, no longer operational). Manufacturers of HCSE preparations and experts on the subject were contacted for published and unpublished material. There were no restrictions on language. SELECTION CRITERIA: RCTs were included if they compared oral HCSE mono-preparations with placebo, or other treatments, in patients with CVI. Trials assessing HCSE as one of several active components in a combination preparation, or as a part of a combination treatment, were excluded. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers independently selected and assessed methodological quality of the studies using a standardised scoring system, and extracted data. Disagreements concerning evaluation of individual trials were resolved through discussion. MAIN RESULTS: Overall, there appeared to be an improvement in CVI related signs and symptoms with HCSE compared with placebo. Leg pain was assessed in seven placebo-controlled trials. Six reported a significant reduction of leg pain in the HCSE groups compared with the placebo groups, while another reported a statistically significant improvement compared with baseline. One trial suggested a weighted mean difference (WMD) of 42.4 mm [95% confidence interval (CI) 34.9 to 49.9] measured on a 100 mm visual analogue scale. Leg volume was assessed in six placebo-controlled trials. Meta-analysis of five trials (n = 289) suggested a significant reduction in favour of HCSE compared with placebo (WMD 56.3 ml [95% CI 24.1 to 88.5]). One trial indicated that HCSE may be as effective as compression stockings at reducing leg volume. Adverse events were usually mild and infrequent. REVIEWERS' CONCLUSIONS: The evidence presented implies that HCSE is an efficacious and safe short-term treatment for CVI. However, several caveats exist and more rigorous RCTs are required to assess the efficacy of this treatment option.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,025 | 0,010 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,021 | 0,004 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,005 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,010 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; les deux têtes enseignantes s’accordent sur ce qui est montré ici.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».