Compression for preventing recurrence of venous ulcers

Background: Up to 1% of adults will suffer from leg ulceration at some time. The majority of leg ulcers are venous in origin and are caused by high pressure in the veins due to blockage or weakness of the valves in the veins of the leg. Prevention and treatment of venous ulcers is aimed at reducing the pressure either by removing / repairing the veins, or by applying compression bandages / stockings to reduce the pressure in the veins. The vast majority of venous ulcers are healed using compression bandages. Once healed they often recur and so it is customary to continue applying compression in the form of bandages, tights, stockings or socks in order to prevent recurrence. Compression bandages or hosiery (tights, stockings, socks) are often applied for ulcer prevention. Objectives To assess the effects of compression hosiery (socks, stockings, tights) or bandages in preventing the recurrence of venous ulcers. To determine whether there is an optimum pressure/type of compression to prevent recurrence of venous ulcers. Search methods The searches for the review were first undertaken in 2000. For this update we searched the Cochrane Wounds Group Specialised Register (October 2007), The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) - The Cochrane Library 2007 Issue 3, Ovid MEDLINE - 1950 to September Week 4 2007, Ovid EMBASE - 1980 to 2007 Week 40 and Ovid CINAHL - 1982 to October Week 1 2007. Selection criteria Randomised controlled trials evaluating compression bandages or hosiery for preventing venous leg ulcers. Data collection and analysis Data extraction and assessment of study quality were undertaken by two authors independently. Results No trials compared recurrence rates with and without compression. One trial (300 patients) compared high (UK Class 3) compression hosiery with moderate (UK Class 2) compression hosiery. A intention to treat analysis found no significant reduction in recurrence at five years follow up associated with high compression hosiery compared with moderate compression hosiery (relative risk of recurrence 0.82, 95% confidence interval 0.61 to 1.12). This analysis would tend to underestimate the effectiveness of the high compression hosiery because a significant proportion of people changed from high compression to medium compression hosiery. Compliance rates were significantly higher with medium compression than with high compression hosiery. One trial (166 patients) found no statistically significant difference in recurrence between two types of medium (UK Class 2) compression hosiery (relative risk of recurrence with Medi was 0.74, 95% confidence interval 0.45 to 1.2). Both trials reported that not wearing compression hosiery was strongly associated with ulcer recurrence and this is circumstantial evidence that compression reduces ulcer recurrence. No trials were found which evaluated compression bandages for preventing ulcer recurrence. Authors' conclusions No trials compared compression with vs no compression for prevention of ulcer recurrence. Not wearing compression was associated with recurrence in both studies identified in this review. This is circumstantial evidence of the benefit of compression in reducing recurrence. Recurrence rates may be lower in high compression hosiery than in medium compression hosiery and therefore patients should be offered the strongest compression with which they can comply. Further trials are needed to determine the effectiveness of hosiery prescribed in other settings, i.e. in the UK community, in countries other than the UK.

Development of a biaxial compression device for biological samples : preliminary experimental results for a closed cell foam

Biological tissues are subjected to complex loading states in vivo and in order to define constitutive equations that effectively simulate their mechanical behaviour under these loads, it is necessary to obtain data on the tissue's response to multiaxial loading. Single axis and shear testing of biological tissues is often carried out, but biaxial testing is less common. We sought to design and commission a biaxial compression testing device, capable of obtaining repeatable data for biological samples. The apparatus comprised a sealed stainless steel pressure vessel specifically designed such that a state of hydrostatic compression could be created on the test specimen while simultaneously unloading the sample along one axis with an equilibrating tensile pressure. Thus a state of equibiaxial compression was created perpendicular to the long axis of a rectangular sample. For the purpose of calibration and commissioning of the vessel, rectangular samples of closed cell ethylene vinyl acetate (EVA) foam were tested. Each sample was subjected to repeated loading, and nine separate biaxial experiments were carried out to a maximum pressure of 204 kPa (30 psi), with a relaxation time of two hours between them. Calibration testing demonstrated the force applied to the samples had a maximum error of 0.026 N (0.423% of maximum applied force). Under repeated loading, the foam sample demonstrated lower stiffness during the first load cycle. Following this cycle, an increased stiffness, repeatable response was observed with successive loading. While the experimental protocol was developed for EVA foam, preliminary results on this material suggest that this device may be capable of providing test data for biological tissue samples. The load response of the foam was characteristic of closed cell foams, with consolidation during the early loading cycles, then a repeatable load-displacement response upon repeated loading. The repeatability of the test results demonstrated the ability of the test device to provide reproducible test data and the low experimental error in the force demonstrated the reliability of the test data.