Pelvic venous disorders (PeVD) are not well represented in obstetrics and gynaecology journals

Abstract

Background

Pelvic venous disorders (PeVD), previously “Pelvic congestion syndrome (PCS)” is usually defined as a female health problem. However, it is our impression that gynaecologists rarely recognise this condition, and most of the research interest appears to be by vascular and venous surgeons, and radiologists. The aim of this study was to investigate if there was evidence to support this view.

Methods

An online search of the PubMed^® database was performed using the search terms “pelvic congestion”, “PCS”, “pelvic venous disorders” and “PeVD”, filtered for relevance to “pelvic veins”. Articles were collected from 2013 to 2024 and analysed for which type of journal they appeared in (obstetrics and/or gynaecology, radiology, vascular, venous, angiology, other) and what sort of article each was (original article, review, case report).

Results

We found 281 articles published for PCS and 38 articles for PeVD, a total of 319 overall. There was a general increase in articles over the time course. However, 33.2% appeared in vascular and venous journals, 20.4% in radiology journals and only 11.3% in obstetric and/or gynaecology journals. There was no indication that the percentage of articles on PCS/PeVD was increasing in the female health journals over the time studied.

Conclusion

PeVD/PCS is under represented in obstetrics and/or gynaecology journals. Most articles appear in vascular and venous journals. This gives rise to concern that women suffering from pelvic pain due to PeVD/PCS tend to consult gynaecologists, rather than vascular and venous specialists who are more actively involved in researching the condition.