Transvenous occlusion of incompetent pelvic veins to treat chronic pelvic pain in women: A randomised controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effectiveness of transvenous occlusion of incompetent pelvic veins in women presenting with chronic pelvic pain (CPP) in improving symptoms and quality of life. DESIGN: Patient-blinded randomised controlled trial with objective outcome measures. Results were analysed on an intention-to-treat basis. SETTING: Gynaecology and Vascular Surgery Services of two teaching hospitals in northwest England. POPULATION: Sixty women aged 18-54 years presenting with CPP after exclusion of other pathology, and who were found to have pelvic vein incompetence. METHODS: Participants were randomised and assigned to contrast venography alone or contrast venography plus transvenous occlusion of the incompetent pelvic veins. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The primary outcome was change in pain score measured using the short-form McGill Pain Score (SF-MPQ) and the Visual Analogue Score (VAS) recorded at 12 months post-randomisation. Secondary outcomes included quality of life using the EQ-5D instrument, symptomatic improvement and procedure-related complications. RESULTS: Sixty participants were randomised to transvenous occlusion of incompetent pelvic veins or venography only. At 12 months, median pain scored 2 (3-10) in the intervention group versus 9 (5-22) in controls (p = 0.016). Pain on the VAS scored 15 (0-3) versus 53 (20-71), respectively (p = 0.002). Median EQ-5D improved after intervention from 0.79 (0.74-0.84) to 0.84 (0.79-1.00; p = 0.008) over 12 months. No major complications were reported. CONCLUSION: Transvenous occlusion of pelvic vein incompetence reduced pain scores, improved quality of life and diminished symptom burden with no major reported complications. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN 15091500.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".