A scoping review of scores or grading systems for pelvic venous disorders

Background: Pelvic venous disorders (PeVD) encompass a variety of conditions linked to chronic pelvic pain in women. However, PeVD remain underdiagnosed due to the absence of universally accepted diagnostic criteria. The complexity of PeVD classifications fi cations across specialties leads to delays in treatment. This scoping review aims to fi ll a gap in PeVD diagnosis and management by identifying all existing scoring or grading systems to lay the foundation for standardized clinical scoring tools for PeVD. Methods: This scoping review was undertaken according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping reviews. Online databases were searched up to April 2023. Studies implementing a scoring or grading system for patients with confirmed fi rmed or suspected PeVD were included. Scores or grading systems were classified fi ed into four main categories based on their use in the study: screening, diagnosis, measure of disease severity, and measure of response to treatment. Results: Of the 2976 unique records identified, fi ed, 82 were reviewed in full, and 20 were included in this study. The publication dates ranged from 1984 to 2023 (median, 2018; interquartile range, 2003-2022). A total of 21 scores and/or grading systems were identified. fi ed. Of these 21 scores, 10 (47.6%) were clinical scores, and 10 (47.6%) were scores based on radiological fi ndings; one study included a score that used both clinical and radiological fi ndings. The identified fi ed scores were used in various settings. Of the 21 scores, 2 (9.52%) were used for screening in a tertiary care setting; 3 (14.3%) were used to establish the PeVD diagnosis; 8 (38.1%) were used to assess disease severity; and 8 (38.1%) were used as measures of response to treatment. Of the eight scores assessing disease severity, four (50.0%) assessed the degree of dilatation of pelvic veins and four (50%) assessed the severity of reflux. fl ux. Only three of the scores were validated. Conclusions: This scoping review identified fi ed a range of scoring and grading systems for PeVD. We note a lack of a validated scoring system, both clinical and radiological, for screening and assessment of disease severity. This is an important fi rst step in developing validated disease-specific fi c scoring systems for patient screening, appropriate referral, assessment of symptom severity, and assessment of the response to treatment. (J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord 2024;12:101901.)