rutin and Skin-Ulcer

The aim of this study was to demonstrate whether HR (Paroven-Venoruton; 0-(beta-hydroxyethyl)-rutosides), was effective in improving the microcirculation in venous hypertension and microangiopathy. Sixty patients with severe venous hypertension due to chronic venous insufficiency, ankle swelling, and lipodermatosclerosis were included. After informed consent, patients were randomized into a treatment group and a placebo group. Patients in the treatment group received oral HR (2 g/day for 8 weeks); those in the placebo group received a comparable placebo.. The two groups were comparable for age and sex distribution. The mean age was 45 years (SD 9) in the treatment group (31 patients) and 45.5 (SD 10) in the placebo group (29 patients). There were no differences between the placebo and treatment groups at inclusion. There was no change between inclusion and measurements at 8 weeks in the placebo group. A significant decrease (P < 0.05) in flux at rest and rate of ankle swelling was observed in the treatment group. The decrease in capillary filtration was associated with improvement in signs and symptoms (P < 0.05). The difference in flux, sign and symptoms, and filtration was clinically important at 8 weeks in the treatment group when compared with the placebo group. No adverse effects were observed.. Venous microangiopathy was improved by HR treatment.

Topics: Adult; Edema; Female; Humans; Hydroxyethylrutoside; Hypertension; Male; Microcirculation; Middle Aged; Placebos; Prospective Studies; Skin Ulcer; Treatment Outcome; Vascular Diseases; Vasoconstrictor Agents; Venous Insufficiency

This study was planned to demonstrate in a prospective, placebo-controlled, randomized study, whether HR (Paroven, Venoruton; 0-(beta-hydroxyethyl)-rutosides), is effective in improving the microcirculation in subjects with diabetic microangiopathy and neuropathy. Patients with severe diabetic microangiopathy, neuropathy and edema, patients with microangiopathy, without neuropathy, and 20 healthy subjects were included. Microangiopathy was defined by laser Doppler flowmetry and capillary filtration (rate of ankle swelling (RAS)). Inclusion criteria were: increase in resting flux (RF) and RAS, a decrease in venoarteriolar response (VAR), and alterations in flux increase with temperature. The 2 groups of patients and the control group were randomized in a treatment sub-group which received HR (1 g, twice daily for 6 months); those in the placebo group received similar treatment.. Groups were comparable; there were no drop-outs. There were no differences in the treatment and placebo groups at inclusion. Treatment was well tolerated; no adverse effects were reported. No variations were observed in healthy subjects at 6 months. In both groups of patients, significant decreases (P < 0.05) in RF and RAS were observed in the active treatment groups. The decrease in RAS was associated with a decrease in edema (P < 0.05) in both treatment groups. The decrease in RF and the increase in VAR were associated with a proportional decrease in RAS (P < 0.05). In patients without neuropathy, the variations in RF, VAR, and RAS were larger (P < 0.05) at 6 months. The variations in healthy subjects were limited and not significant.. The decrease in capillary filtration and edema with HR is associated with symptomatic improvement. The action on edema is beneficial for the evolution of neuropathy. The effects of HR on flux, RAS, and edema are important in early stages of microangiopathy to avoid progression to clinical stages.

Topics: Adult; Diabetic Angiopathies; Diabetic Neuropathies; Edema; Female; Humans; Hydroxyethylrutoside; Hypertension; Laser-Doppler Flowmetry; Male; Microcirculation; Middle Aged; Placebos; Skin Ulcer; Treatment Outcome; Vasoconstrictor Agents

The aim of this study was to demonstrate whether HR (Paroven, Venoruton; 0-(beta-hydroxyethyl)-rutosides), was effective in improving levels of plasma free radicals (PFRs) in patients with chronic venous insufficiency (CVI) and venous microangiopathy. Patients were randomized into the treatment group, which received oral HR (1g sachets, twice daily, for 4 weeks), and a placebo group, which received comparable placebo. Below-knee Sigvaris stockings were used during the study. PFRs were measured with the D-Rom test at the finger and at a vein of the leg in an area of CVI. The mean age of included subjects was 46 years (SD 11) in the treatment group (20 patients; 6 females) and 46.4 (SD 8) in the placebo group (20 patients; 7 females). There were no differences between placebo and treatment groups at inclusion in age and sex distribution and in parameters indicating venous hypertension. The decrease of PFRs levels in the treatment group was significant, both at the finger and in the distal blood taken in areas of CVI. There there were no significant changes in the control group. In areas of venous hypertension, PFRs values were on average higher than at the finger (systemic) level (P < 0.05). In parallel with the progressive decrease in PFRs associated with treatment, the analogue score was significantly decreased at 2 (P < 0.05) and 4 weeks (P < 0.02) in the HR group. No changes were observed in the placebo group. No adverse effects were observed. In conclusion, HR treatment is effective in decreasing both the systemic and local values of PFRs and therefore may have a positive effect on the evolution of CVI.

Topics: Adult; Female; Free Radicals; Humans; Hydroxyethylrutoside; Hypertension; Male; Middle Aged; Placebos; Prospective Studies; Skin Ulcer; Treatment Outcome; Varicose Veins; Vascular Diseases; Venous Insufficiency