There is no specific treatment for thrombophilia, unless it is caused by an underlying medical illness (such as nephrotic syndrome), where the treatment of the underlying disease is needed. In those with unprovoked and/or recurrent thrombosis, or those with a high-risk form of thrombophilia, the most important decision is whether to use anticoagulation medications, such as warfarin, on a long-term basis to reduce the risk of further episodes. This risk needs to weighed against the risk that the treatment will cause significant bleeding, as the reported risk of major bleeding is over 3% per year, and 11% of those with major bleeding may die as a result.

Apart from the abovementioned forms of thrombophilia, the risk of recurrence after an episode of thrombosis is determined by factors such as the extent and severity of the original thrombosis, whether it was provoked (such as by immobilization or pregnancy), the number of previous thrombotic events, male sex, the presence of an inferior vena cava filter, the presence of cancer, symptoms of post-thrombotic syndrome, and obesity. These factors tend to be more important in the decision than the presence or absence of a detectable thrombophilia.

Those with antiphospholipid syndrome may be offered long-term anticoagulation after a first unprovoked episode of thrombosis. The risk is determined by the subtype of antibody detected, by the antibody titer (amount of antibodies), whether multiple antibodies are detected, and whether it is detected repeatedly or only on a single occasion.

Women with a thrombophilia who are contemplating pregnancy or are pregnant usually require alternatives to warfarin during pregnancy, especially in the first 13 weeks, when it may produce abnormalities in the unborn child. Low molecular weight heparin (LMWH, such as enoxaparin) is generally used as an alternative. Warfarin and LMWH may safely be used in breastfeeding.

When women experience recurrent pregnancy loss secondary to thrombophilia, some studies have suggested that low molecular weight heparin reduces the risk of miscarriage. When the results of all studies are analysed together, no statistically signifiant benefit could be demonstrated.

Protamine reverses the effect of unfractionated heparin, but only partially binds to and reverses LMWH. A dose of 1 mg protamine / 100 IU LMWH reverses 90% of its anti-IIa and 60% of anti-Xa activity, but the clinical effect of the residual anti-Xa activity is not known. Both anti-IIa and anti-Xa activity may return up to three hours after protamine reversal, possibly due to release of additional LMWH from depot tissues.

Anticoagulant therapy with LMWH is not usually monitored. LMWH therapy does not affect the prothrombin time (PT) or the INR, and anti-Xa levels are not reliable. It can prolong the partial thromboplastin time (APTT) in some women, but still, the APTT is not useful for monitoring.

To check for any thrombocytopenia, platelet count should be checked prior to commencing anticoagulant therapy, then seven to 10 days after commencement, and monthly thereafter. Platelet count should also be checked if unexpected bruising or bleeding occurs.

Inferior vena cava filters (IVC filters) are used on the presumption that they reduce PE, although their effectiveness and safety profile are not well established. In general, they are only recommended in some high risk scenarios. The ACCP recommended them for those with a contraindication to anticoagulant treatment but not in addition to anticoagulation, unless an individual with an IVC filter but without a risk for bleeding develops acute proximal DVT. In this case, both anticoagulation and an IVC filter are suggested. NICE recommends caval filters in settings where someone with an acute proximal DVT or PE cannot receive anticoagulation, and that the filter is removed when anticoagulation can be safely started. While IVC filters themselves are associated with a long-term risk of DVT, they are not reason enough to maintain extended anticoagulation.

Thrombolysis is the administration of an enzyme (intravenous or directly into the affected vein through a catheter), which acts to enzymatically break up clots. This may reduce the risk of post-thrombotic syndrome by a third, and possibly reduce the risk of leg ulcers, but is associated with an increased risk of bleeding. The ACCP currently suggests anticoagulation rather than thrombolysis, but patients may choose thrombolysis if prevention of post-thrombotic syndrome outweighs concerns over the complexity, bleeding risk, and cost of the procedure. NICE recommends that thrombolysis is considered in those who have had symptoms for less than two weeks, are normally well, have a good life expectancy and a low risk of bleeding.

A mechanical thrombectomy device can remove venous clots, although the ACCP considers it an option only when the following conditions apply: "iliofemoral DVT, symptoms for < 7 days (criterion used in the single randomized trial), good functional status, life expectancy of ≥ 1 year, and both resources and expertise are available." Anticoagulation alone is suggested over thrombectomy.

Anticoagulation, which prevents further coagulation, but does not act directly on existing clots, is the standard treatment for DVT. Balancing risk vs. benefit is important in determining the duration of anticoagulation, and three months is generally the standard length of treatment. In those with an annual risk of VTE in excess of 9%, as after an unprovoked episode, extended anticoagulation is a possibility. Those who finish VKA treatment after idiopathic VTE with an elevated D-dimer level show an increased risk of recurrent VTE (about 9% vs about 4% for normal results), and this result might be used in clinical decision-making. Thrombophilia test results rarely play a role in the length of treatment.

For acute cases in the leg, the ACCP recommended a parenteral anticoagulant (such as LMWH, fondaparinux, or unfractionated heparin) for at least five days and a VKA, the oral anticoagulant, the same day. LMWH and fondaparinux are suggested over unfractionated heparin, but both are retained in those with compromised kidney function, unlike unfractionated heparin. The VKA is generally taken for a minimum of three months to maintain an international normalized ratio of 2.0–3.0, with 2.5 as the target. The benefit of taking a VKA declines as the duration of treatment extends, and the risk of bleeding increases with age.

The ACCP recommended treatment for three months in those with proximal DVT provoked by surgery. A three-month course is also recommended for those with proximal DVT provoked by a transient risk factor, and three months is suggested over lengthened treatment when bleeding risk is low to moderate. Unprovoked DVT patients should have at least three months of anticoagulation and be considered for extended treatment. Those whose first VTE is an unprovoked proximal DVT are suggested for anticoagulation longer than three months unless there is a high risk of bleeding. In that case, three months is sufficient. Those with a second unprovoked VTE are recommended for extended treatment when bleeding risk is low, suggested for extended treatment when bleeding risk is moderate, and suggested for three months of anticoagulation in high-risk scenarios.

Recommendations for those without cancer include anticoagulation (stopping further blood clots from forming) with dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban, or edoxaban rather than warfarin or low molecular weight heparin (LMWH). For those with cancer LMWH is recommended. For initial treatment of VTE, fixed doses with LMWH may be more effective than adjusted doses of unfractionated heparin (UFH) in reducing blood clots. No differences in mortality, prevention of major bleeding, or preventing VTEs from recurring were observed between LMWH and UFH. No differences have been detected in the route of administration of UFH (subcutaneous or intravenous). LMWH is usually administered by a subcutaneous injection, and a persons blood clotting factors do not have to be monitored as closely as with UFH. People with cancer have a higher risk of experiencing reoccurring VTE episodes ("recurrent VTE"), despite taking preventative anticoagulation medication. These people should be given therapeutic doses of LMWH medication, either by switching from another anticoagulant or by taking a higher dose of LMWH.

For those with a small pulmonary embolism and few risk factors, no anticoagulation is needed. Anticoagulation is; however, recommended in those who do have risk factors. Thrombolysis is recommended in those with PEs that are causing low blood pressure.

Warfarin and vitamin K antagonists are anticoagulants that can be taken orally to reduce thromboembolic occurrence. Where a more effective response is required, heparin can be given (by injection) concomitantly. As a side effect of any anticoagulant, the risk of bleeding is increased, so the international normalized ratio of blood is monitored. Self-monitoring and self-management are safe options for competent patients, though their practice varies. In Germany, about 20% of patients were self-managed while only 1% of U.S. patients did home self-testing (according to one 2012 study). Other medications such as direct thrombin inhibitors and direct Xa inhibitors are increasingly being used instead of warfarin.

Evidence-based clinical guidelines were published in 2016 for the treatment of VTE.

If someone has coagulopathy, their health care provider may help them manage their symptoms with medications or replacement therapy. In replacement therapy, the reduced or absent clotting factors are replaced with proteins derived from human blood or created in the laboratory. This therapy may be given either to treat bleeding that has already begun or to prevent bleeding from occurring.

The treatment for thrombosis depends on whether it is in a vein or an artery, the impact on the person, and the risk of complications from treatment.

One area of treatment is managing people with major bleeding in a critical setting, like an emergency department. In these situations, the common treatment is transfusing a combination of red cells with one of the following options:

- Blood plasma

- Prothrombin complex concentrate, factor XIII, and fibrinogen

- Fibrinogen with tranexamic acid

The use of tranexamic acid is the only option that is currently supported by a large, randomized, controlled clinical trial, and is given to people with major bleeding after trauma. There are several possible risks to treating coagulopathies, such as transfusion-related acute lung injury, acute respiratory distress syndrome, multiple organ dysfunction syndrome, major hemorrhage, and venous thromboembolism.

Various studies have investigated the use of anticoagulation to suppress blood clot formation in cerebral venous sinus thrombosis. Before these trials had been conducted, there had been a concern that small areas of hemorrhage in the brain would bleed further as a result of treatment; the studies showed that this concern was unfounded. Clinical practice guidelines now recommend heparin or low molecular weight heparin in the initial treatment, followed by warfarin, provided there are no other bleeding risks that would make these treatments unsuitable. Some experts discourage the use of anticoagulation if there is extensive hemorrhage; in that case, they recommend repeating the imaging after 7–10 days. If the hemorrhage has decreased in size, anticoagulants are started, while no anticoagulants are given if there is no reduction.

The duration of warfarin treatment depends on the circumstances and underlying causes of the condition. If the thrombosis developed under temporary circumstances (e.g. pregnancy), three months are regarded as sufficient. If the condition was unprovoked but there are no clear causes or a "mild" form of thrombophilia, 6 to 12 months is advised. If there is a severe underlying thrombosis disorder, warfarin treatment may need to continue indefinitely.

Thrombolysis (removal of the blood clot with "clot buster" medication) has been described, either systemically by injection into a vein or directly into the clot during angiography. The 2006 European Federation of Neurological Societies guideline recommends that thrombolysis is only used in patients who deteriorate despite adequate treatment, and other causes of deterioration have been eliminated. It is unclear which drug and which mode of administration is the most effective. Bleeding into the brain and in other sites of the body is a major concern in the use of thrombolysis. American guidelines make no recommendation with regards to thrombolysis, stating that more research is needed.

Raised intracranial pressure, if severe or threatening vision, may require therapeutic lumbar puncture (removal of excessive cerebrospinal fluid), medication (acetazolamide), or neurosurgical treatment (optic nerve sheath fenestration or shunting). In certain situations, anticonvulsants may be used to try to prevent seizures. These situations include focal neurological problems (e.g. inability to move a limb) and focal changes of the brain tissue on CT or MRI scan. Evidence to support or refute the use of antiepileptic drugs as a preventive measure, however, is lacking.

Surgery to remove the clot is possible, but rarely performed. In the past, surgical removal of the renal vein clot was the primary treatment but it is very invasive and many complications can occur. In the past decades, treatment has shifted its focus from surgical intervention to medical treatments that include intravenous and oral anticoagulants. The use of anticoagulants may improve renal function in RVT cases by removing the clot in the vein and preventing further clots from occurring. Patients already suffering from nephrotic syndrome may not need to take anticoagulants. In this case, patients should keep an eye out and maintain reduced level of proteinuria by reducing salt and excess protein, and intaking diuretics and statins. Depending on the severity of RVT, patients may be on anticoagulants from a year up to a lifetime. As long as the albumen levels in the bloodstream are below 2.5g/L, it is recommended that RVT patients continue taking anticoagulants. Main anticoagulants that can be used to treat RVT include warfarin and low molecular weight heparin. Heparin has become very popular, because of its low risk of complications, its availability and because it can easily be administered. Warfarin is known to interact with many other drugs, so careful monitoring is required. If a nephrotic syndrome patient experiences any of the RVT symptoms (flank or back pain, blood in the urine or decreased renal function), he or she should immediately see a doctor to avoid further complications.

The main side effect of anticoagulants is the risk of excessive bleeding. Other side effects include: blood in the urine or feces, severe bruising, prolonged nosebleeds (lasting longer than 10 minutes), bleeding gum, blood in your vomit or coughing up blood, unusual headaches, sudden severe back pain, difficulty breathing or chest pain, in women, heavy or increased bleeding during the period, or any other bleeding from the vagina. Warfarin can cause rashes, diarrhea, nausea (feeling sick) or vomiting, and hair loss. Heparin can cause hair loss (alopecia) thrombocytopenia – a sudden drop in the number of platelets in the blood.

It has been reported in a case study of 27 patients with nephrotic syndrome caused RVT, there was a 40% mortality rate, mostly due to hemorrhagic complications and sepsis. In 75% of the remaining surviving patients, the RVT was resolved and renal function returned to normal. It has been concluded that age is not a factor on the survival of RVT patients, although older patient (55 and older) are more likely to develop renal failure. Heparin is crucial in returning normal renal function; in patients that did not take heparin, long term renal damage was observed in 100%. In patients that did take heparin, renal damage was observed in about 33%. By quickly treating, and receiving the correct medications, patients should increase their chances of survival and reduce the risk of the renal vein clot from migrating to another part of the body.

Treatment with compression stockings should be offered to patients with lower extremity superficial phlebitis, if not contraindicated (e.g., peripheral artery disease). Patients may find them helpful for reducing swelling and pain once the acute inflammation subsides.

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAID) are effective in relieving the pain associated with venous inflammation and were found in a randomized trial to significantly decrease extension and/or recurrence of superficial vein thrombosis.

Anticoagulation for patients with lower extremity superficial thrombophlebitis at increased risk for thromboembolism (affected venous segment of ≥5 cm, in proximity to deep venous system, positive medical risk factors).

Treatment with fondaparinux reduces the risk of subsequent venous thromboembolism.

Surgery reserved for extension of the clot to within 1 cm of the saphenofemoral junction in patients deemed unreliable for anticoagulation, failure of anticoagulation and patients with intense pain. Surgical therapy with ligation of saphenofemoral junction or stripping of thrombosed superficial veins appears to be associated higher rates of venous thromboembolism compared with treatment with anitcoagulants.

There are divergent views as to whether everyone with an unprovoked episode of thrombosis should be investigated for thrombophilia. Even those with a form of thrombophilia may not necessarily be at risk of further thrombosis, while recurrent thrombosis is more likely in those who have had previous thrombosis even in those who have no detectable thrombophilic abnormalities. Recurrent thromboembolism, or thrombosis in unusual sites (e.g. the hepatic vein in Budd-Chiari syndrome), is a generally accepted indication for screening. It is more likely to be cost-effective in people with a strong personal or family history of thrombosis. In contrast, the combination of thrombophilia with other risk factors may provide an indication for preventative treatment, which is why thrombophilia testing may be performed even in those who would not meet the strict criteria for these tests. Searching for a coagulation abnormality is not normally undertaken in patients in whom thrombosis has an obvious trigger. For example, if the thrombosis is due to immobilization after recent orthopedic surgery, it is regarded as "provoked" by the immobilization and the surgery and it is less likely that investigations will yield clinically important results.

When venous thromboembolism occurs when a patient is experiencing transient major risk factors such as prolonged immobility, surgery, or trauma, testing for thrombophilia is not appropriate because the outcome of the test would not change a patient's indicated treatment. In 2013, the American Society of Hematology, as part of recommendations in the Choosing Wisely campaign, cautioned against overuse of thrombophilia screening; false positive results of testing would lead to people inappropriately being labeled as having thrombophilia, and being treated with anticoagulants without clinical need

In the United Kingdom, professional guidelines give specific indications for thrombophilia testing. It is recommended that testing be done only after appropriate counseling, and hence the investigations are usually not performed at the time when thrombosis is diagnosed but at a later time. In particular situations, such as retinal vein thrombosis, testing is discouraged altogether because thrombophilia is not regarded as a major risk factor. In other rare conditions generally linked with hypercoagulability, such as cerebral venous thrombosis and portal vein thrombosis, there is insufficient data to state for certain whether thrombophilia screening is helpful, and decisions on thrombophilia screening in these conditions are therefore not regarded as evidence-based. If cost-effectiveness (quality-adjusted life years in return for expenditure) is taken as a guide, it is generally unclear whether thrombophilia investigations justify the often high cost, unless the testing is restricted to selected situations.

Recurrent miscarriage is an indication for thrombophilia screening, particularly antiphospholipid antibodies (anti-cardiolipin IgG and IgM, as well as lupus anticoagulant), factor V Leiden and prothrombin mutation, activated protein C resistance and a general assessment of coagulation through an investigation known as thromboelastography.

Women who are planning to use oral contraceptives do not benefit from routine screening for thrombophilias, as the absolute risk of thrombotic events is low. If either the woman or a first-degree relative has suffered from thrombosis, the risk of developing thrombosis is increased. Screening this selected group may be beneficial, but even when negative may still indicate residual risk. Professional guidelines therefore suggest that alternative forms of contraception be used rather than relying on screening.

Thrombophilia screening in people with arterial thrombosis is generally regarded unrewarding and is generally discouraged, except possibly for unusually young patients (especially when precipitated by smoking or use of estrogen-containing hormonal contraceptives) and those in whom revascularization, such as coronary arterial bypass, fails because of rapid occlusion of the graft.

A minority of patients can be treated medically with sodium restriction, diuretics to control ascites, anticoagulants such as heparin and warfarin, and general symptomatic management. The majority of patients require further intervention. Milder forms of Budd–Chiari may be treated with surgical shunts to divert blood flow around the obstruction or the liver itself. Shunts must be placed early after diagnosis for best results. The TIPS is similar to a surgical shunt: it accomplishes the same goal but has a lower procedure-related mortality—a factor that has led to a growth in its popularity. If all the hepatic veins are blocked, the portal vein can be approached via the intrahepatic part of inferior vena cava, a procedure called DIPS (direct intrahepatic portocaval shunt). Patients with stenosis or vena caval obstruction may benefit from angioplasty. Limited studies on thrombolysis with direct infusion of urokinase and tissue plasminogen activator into the obstructed vein have shown moderate success in treating Budd–Chiari syndrome; however, it is not routinely attempted.

Liver transplantation is an effective treatment for Budd–Chiari. It is generally reserved for patients with fulminant liver failure, failure of shunts or progression of cirrhosis that reduces the life expectancy to 1 year. Long-term survival after transplantation ranges from 69–87%. The most common complications of transplant include rejection, arterial or venous thromboses and bleeding due to anticoagulation. Up to 10% of patients may have a recurrence of Budd–Chiari syndrome after the transplant.

Prevention of PTS begins with prevention of initial and recurrent DVT. For people hospitalized at high-risk of DVT, prevention methods may include early ambulation, use of compression stockings or electrostimulation devices, and/or anticoagulant medications.

Increasingly, catheter-directed thrombolysis has been employed. This is a procedure in which interventional radiology will break up a clot using a variety of methods.

For people who have already had a single DVT event, the best way to prevent a second DVT is appropriate anticoagulation therapy.

A second prevention approach may be weight loss for those who are overweight or obese. Increased weight can put more stress and pressure on leg veins, and can predispose patients to developing PTS.

Treatment is aimed at controlling symptoms and improving the interrupted blood flow to the affected area of the body.

Medications include:

- Antithrombotic medication. These are commonly given because thromboembolism is the major cause of arterial embolism. Examples are:

- Anticoagulants (such as warfarin or heparin) and antiplatelet medication (such as aspirin, ticlopidine, and clopidogrel) can prevent new clots from forming

- Thrombolytics (such as streptokinase) can dissolve clots

- Painkillers given intravenously

- Vasodilators to relax and dilate blood vessels.

Appropriate drug treatments successfully produces thrombolysis and removal of the clot in 50% to 80% of all cases.

Antithrombotic agents may be administered directly onto the clot in the vessel using a flexible catheter ("intra-arterial thrombolysis"). Intra-arterial thrombolysis reduces thromboembolic occlusion by 95% in 50% of cases, and restores adequate blood flow in 50% to 80% of cases.

Surgical procedures include:

- Arterial bypass surgery to create another source of blood supply

- Embolectomy, to remove the embolus, with various techniques available:

- Thromboaspiration

- Angioplasty with balloon catheterization with or without implanting a stent Balloon catheterization or open embolectomy surgery reduces mortality by nearly 50% and the need for limb amputation by approximately 35%.

- Embolectomy by open surgery on the artery

If extensive necrosis and gangrene has set in an arm or leg, the limb may have to be amputated. Limb amputation is in itself usually remarkably well tolerated, but is associated with a substantial mortality (~50%), primarily because of the severity of the diseases in patients where it is indicated.

Treatment options for PTS include proper leg elevation, compression therapy with elastic stockings, or electrostimulation devices, pharmacotherapy (pentoxifylline), herbal remedies (such as horse chestnut, rutosides), and wound care for leg ulcers.

The benefits of compression bandages is unclear. They may be useful to treat edemas.

How well a patient does depends on the location of the clot and to what extent the clot has blocked blood flow. Arterial embolism can be serious if not treated promptly.

Without treatment, it has a 25% to 30% mortality rate. The affected area can be permanently damaged, and up to approximately 25% of cases require amputation of an affected extremity.

Arterial emboli may recur even after successful treatment.

It is known that diabetes causes changes to factors associated with coagulation and clotting, however not much is known of the risk of thromboembolism, or clots, in diabetic patients. There are some studies that show that diabetes increases the risk of thromboembolism; other studies show that diabetes does not increase the risk of thromboembolism. A study conducted in the Umea University Hospital, in Sweden, observed patients that were hospitalized due to an thromboembolism from 1997 to 1999. The researchers had access to patient information including age, sex, vein thromboembolism diagnosis, diagnostic methods, diabetes type and medical history. This study concluded that there is, in fact, an increased risk of thromboembolism development in diabetic patients, possibly due to factors associated with diabetes or diabetes itself. Diabetic patients are twice as likely to develop a thromboembolism than are non-diabetic patient. The exact mechanism of how diabetes increases the risk of clot formation remains unclear and could possibly be a future direction for study.

From previous studies, it is known that long distance air travel is associated with high risk of venous thrombosis. Long periods of inactivity in a limited amount of space may be a reason for the increased risk of blood clot formation. In addition, bent knees compresses the vein behind the knee (the popliteal vein) and the low humidity, low oxygen, high cabin pressure and consumption of alcohol concentrate the blood. A recent study, published in the British Journal of Haematology in 2014, determined which groups of people, are most at risk for developing a clot during or after a long flight. The study focused on 8755 frequent flying employees from international companies and organizations. It found that travelers who have recently undergone a surgical procedure or who have a malignant disease such as cancer or who are pregnant are most at risk. Preventative measures before flying may be taken in these at-risk groups as a solution.

Patients who have undergone kidney transplant have a high risk of developing RVT (about 0.4% to 6%). RVT is known to account for a large proportion of transplanted kidney failures due to technical problems (damage to the renal vein), clotting disorders, diabetes, consumption of ciclosporin or an unknown problem. Patients who have undergone a kidney transplant are commonly prescribed ciclosporin, an immunosuppressant drug which is known to reduce renal blood flow, increase platelet aggregation in the blood and cause damage to the endothelial tissue of the veins. In a clinical study conducted by the Nuffield Department of Surgery at the Oxford Transplant Centre, UK, transplant patients were given low doses of aspirin, which has a some anti-platelet activity. There is risk of bleeding in transplant patients when using anticoagulants like warfarin and herapin. Low dosage of aspirin was used as an alternative. The study concluded that a routine low-dose of aspirin in kidney transplant patients who are also taking ciclosporin significantly reduces the risk of RVT development.

Treatment can be either conservative or active. Active treatments can be divided into surgical and non-surgical treatments. Newer methods including endovenous laser treatment, radiofrequency ablation and foam sclerotherapy appear to work as well as surgery for varices of the greater saphenous vein.

Oxygen consumption of skeletal muscle is approximately 50 times larger while contracting than in the resting state. Thus, resting the affected limb should delay onset of infarction substantially after arterial occlusion.

Low molecular weight heparin is used to reduce or at least prevent enlargement of a thrombus, and is also indicated before any surgery. In the legs, below the inguinal ligament, percutaneous aspiration thrombectomy is a rapid and effective way of removing thromboembolic occlusions. Balloon thrombectomy using a Fogarty catheter may also be used. In the arms, balloon thrombectomy is an effective treatment for thromboemboli as well. However, local thrombi from atherosclerotic plaque are harder to treat than embolized ones. If results are not satisfying, another angiography should be performed.

Thrombolysis using analogs of tissue plasminogen activator (tPA) may be used as an alternative or complement to surgery. Where there is extensive vascular damage, bypass surgery of the vessels may be necessary to establish other ways to supply the affected parts.

Swelling of the limb may cause inhibited flow by increased pressure, and in the legs (but very rarely in the arms), this may indicate a fasciotomy, opening up all four leg compartments.

Because of the high recurrence rates of thromboembolism, it is necessary to administer anticoagulant therapy as well. Aspirin and low molecular weight heparin should be administered, and possibly warfarin as well. Follow-up includes checking peripheral pulses and the arm-leg blood pressure gradient.

The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) produced clinical guidelines in July 2013 recommending that all people with symptomatic varicose veins (C2S) and worse should be referred to a vascular service for treatment. Conservative treatments such as support stockings should not be used unless treatment was not possible.

The symptoms of varicose veins can be controlled to an extent with the following:

- Elevating the legs often provides temporary symptomatic relief.

- Advice about regular exercise sounds sensible but is not supported by any evidence.

- The wearing of graduated compression stockings with variable pressure gradients (Class II or III) has been shown to correct the swelling, nutritional exchange, and improve the microcirculation in legs affected by varicose veins. They also often provide relief from the discomfort associated with this disease. Caution should be exercised in their use in patients with concurrent peripheral arterial disease.

- The wearing of intermittent pneumatic compression devices have been shown to reduce swelling and increase circulation

- Diosmin/hesperidin and other flavonoids.

- Anti-inflammatory medication such as ibuprofen or aspirin can be used as part of treatment for superficial thrombophlebitis along with graduated compression hosiery – but there is a risk of intestinal bleeding. In extensive superficial thrombophlebitis, consideration should be given to anti-coagulation, thrombectomy, or sclerotherapy of the involved vein.

- Topical gel application helps in managing symptoms related to varicose veins such as inflammation, pain, swelling, itching, and dryness.

Anticoagulant therapy is the mainstay of treatment. Acutely, supportive treatments, such as oxygen or analgesia, may be required. People are often admitted to hospital in the early stages of treatment, and tend to remain under inpatient care until the INR has reached therapeutic levels. Increasingly, however, low-risk cases are managed at home in a fashion already common in the treatment of DVT. Evidence to support one approach versus the other is weak.