The effect of compression stockings on patients with lower extremity venous ulcers: A meta-analysis.

IF 1.5
Huan Wang, Jianmei Gong, Dongmei Han, Xiaoyuan Wang, Haifeng Cheng, Wenna Ou
{"title":"The effect of compression stockings on patients with lower extremity venous ulcers: A meta-analysis.","authors":"Huan Wang, Jianmei Gong, Dongmei Han, Xiaoyuan Wang, Haifeng Cheng, Wenna Ou","doi":"10.1177/02683555261493226","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>ObjectiveThis study aims to systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of compression stockings compared with other active compression modalities and surgical interventions in the management of venous leg ulcers, and to explore the impacts of intervention duration, reported compression pressure, and comparator heterogeneity on pooled outcomes.MethodsLiterature searches were conducted in eight databases for randomized controlled trials on the effects of compression stockings in patients with venous leg ulcers. The search period was from the database establishment to April 20, 2026. Two researchers independently screened the literature, extracted data, and evaluated methodological quality according to inclusion and exclusion criteria, and then performed a Meta-analysis.ResultsA total of 12 randomized controlled trials involving 1206 patients were ultimately included. Meta-analysis results demonstrated that the patients in the compression stocking group had higher ulcer healing rates compared to the control group [<i>RR</i> = 1.39, 95%<i>CI</i> (1.11, 1.74), <i>P =</i> .004], a greater reduction in ulcer wound area [<i>MD</i> = 5.10, 95%<i>CI</i> (1.60, 8.60), <i>P</i> < .01], and lower ulcer recurrence rates [<i>RR</i> = 0.56, 95%<i>CI</i> (0.37, 0.84), <i>P</i> < .01]. Subgroup analyses indicated that intervention duration could potentially have a modifying effect: interventions lasting ≤12 weeks showed beneficial outcomes, but longer-duration treatments did not, though the between-subgroup difference test did not yield a significant result. Subgroup analysis stratified by stocking layer type found that two-layer compression stockings delivered significant healing benefits, although the between-subgroup difference test did not return a significant result. Sensitivity analysis, which excluded two studies using atypical comparators, confirmed that the healing-rate result was robust. However, no statistically significant differences were observed in adverse event incidence or ulcer healing time between the compression stocking group and the control group [<i>RR</i> = 0.87, 95%<i>CI</i> (0.63, 1.20), <i>P</i> = .40] and [<i>MD</i> = -1.19, 95%<i>CI</i> (-6.85, 4.47), <i>P</i> = .68], respectively. The evidence quality for the indicators of adverse event incidence was of moderate quality, while the rest were of low quality.ConclusionBased on limited evidence, compared with other compression modalities, compression stockings are associated with higher ulcer healing rates, greater wound area reduction, lower recurrence rates, and have favourable safety profiles. However, compression stockings do not outperform other compression modalities across all measured outcomes, as no significant difference was observed in healing time. These findings should be interpreted with caution, due to substantial heterogeneity among included studies, under-reporting of actual compression pressure, and insufficient documentation of baseline ulcer characteristics and treatment adherence.</p>","PeriodicalId":94350,"journal":{"name":"Phlebology","volume":" ","pages":"2683555261493226"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Phlebology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/02683555261493226","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ObjectiveThis study aims to systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of compression stockings compared with other active compression modalities and surgical interventions in the management of venous leg ulcers, and to explore the impacts of intervention duration, reported compression pressure, and comparator heterogeneity on pooled outcomes.MethodsLiterature searches were conducted in eight databases for randomized controlled trials on the effects of compression stockings in patients with venous leg ulcers. The search period was from the database establishment to April 20, 2026. Two researchers independently screened the literature, extracted data, and evaluated methodological quality according to inclusion and exclusion criteria, and then performed a Meta-analysis.ResultsA total of 12 randomized controlled trials involving 1206 patients were ultimately included. Meta-analysis results demonstrated that the patients in the compression stocking group had higher ulcer healing rates compared to the control group [RR = 1.39, 95%CI (1.11, 1.74), P = .004], a greater reduction in ulcer wound area [MD = 5.10, 95%CI (1.60, 8.60), P < .01], and lower ulcer recurrence rates [RR = 0.56, 95%CI (0.37, 0.84), P < .01]. Subgroup analyses indicated that intervention duration could potentially have a modifying effect: interventions lasting ≤12 weeks showed beneficial outcomes, but longer-duration treatments did not, though the between-subgroup difference test did not yield a significant result. Subgroup analysis stratified by stocking layer type found that two-layer compression stockings delivered significant healing benefits, although the between-subgroup difference test did not return a significant result. Sensitivity analysis, which excluded two studies using atypical comparators, confirmed that the healing-rate result was robust. However, no statistically significant differences were observed in adverse event incidence or ulcer healing time between the compression stocking group and the control group [RR = 0.87, 95%CI (0.63, 1.20), P = .40] and [MD = -1.19, 95%CI (-6.85, 4.47), P = .68], respectively. The evidence quality for the indicators of adverse event incidence was of moderate quality, while the rest were of low quality.ConclusionBased on limited evidence, compared with other compression modalities, compression stockings are associated with higher ulcer healing rates, greater wound area reduction, lower recurrence rates, and have favourable safety profiles. However, compression stockings do not outperform other compression modalities across all measured outcomes, as no significant difference was observed in healing time. These findings should be interpreted with caution, due to substantial heterogeneity among included studies, under-reporting of actual compression pressure, and insufficient documentation of baseline ulcer characteristics and treatment adherence.

压缩袜对下肢静脉溃疡患者的影响:一项荟萃分析。
目的:本研究旨在系统评估加压袜与其他主动加压方式和手术干预在下肢静脉性溃疡治疗中的有效性和安全性,并探讨干预时间、报告的加压压力和比较物异质性对合并结果的影响。方法对8个数据库进行文献检索,随机对照试验研究加压袜对下肢静脉性溃疡患者的影响。检索时间为数据库建立至2026年4月20日。两名研究者独立筛选文献,提取数据,并根据纳入和排除标准评估方法学质量,然后进行meta分析。结果最终纳入12项随机对照试验,共1206例患者。meta分析结果显示,与对照组相比,压缩袜组患者溃疡愈合率较高[RR = 1.39, 95%CI (1.11, 1.74), P = 0.004],溃疡创面面积减少较多[MD = 5.10, 95%CI (1.60, 8.60), P < 0.01],溃疡复发率较低[RR = 0.56, 95%CI (0.37, 0.84), P < 0.01]。亚组分析表明,干预持续时间可能有潜在的调节作用:持续≤12周的干预显示出有益的结果,但持续时间较长的治疗没有,尽管亚组间差异检验没有产生显著结果。按袜层类型分层的亚组分析发现,两层压缩袜具有显著的治疗效果,尽管亚组间差异测试没有返回显着结果。敏感性分析排除了两项使用非典型比较物的研究,证实了治愈率的结果是稳健的。但在不良事件发生率和溃疡愈合时间方面,压缩袜组与对照组比较,差异均无统计学意义[RR = 0.87, 95%CI (0.63, 1.20), P = 0.40]和[MD = -1.19, 95%CI (-6.85, 4.47), P = 0.68]。不良事件发生率指标的证据质量为中等质量,其余指标为低质量。基于有限的证据,与其他压缩方式相比,压缩袜具有更高的溃疡愈合率,更大的伤口面积缩小,更低的复发率,并具有良好的安全性。然而,在所有测量结果中,压缩袜并不优于其他压缩方式,因为在愈合时间上没有观察到显着差异。这些发现应谨慎解释,因为纳入的研究存在很大的异质性,实际压缩压力的报告不足,以及基线溃疡特征和治疗依从性的文献不足。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书