Caroline Gjorup1, Bo Zerahn, Helle W Hendel. 1. Department of Clinical Physiology and Nuclear Medicine, Herlev University Hospital, Herlev, Denmark. caroline@gjorup.com
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Following treatment for breast cancer 12%-60% develop breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL). There are several ways of assessing BCRL. Circumference measurement (CM) and water displacement (WD) for volume measurements (VM) are frequently used methods in practice and research, respectively. The aim of this study was to evaluate CM and WD for VM of the BCRL arm and the contralateral arm, comparing the results with regional dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA). METHODS AND RESULTS: Twenty-four women with unilateral BCRL were included in the study. Blinded duplicate VM were obtained from both arms using the three methods mentioned above. CM and DXA were performed by two observers. WD was performed by a group of observers. Mean differences (d) in duplicated volumes, limits of agreement (LOA), and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for each method. The repeatability expressed as d (95% CI) between the duplicated VM of the BCRL arm and the contralateral arm was for DXA 3 ml (-6-11) and 3 ml (1-7), respectively. For CM and WD, the d (95% CI) of the BCRL arm were 107 ml (86-127) and 26 ml (-26-79), respectively and in the contralateral arm 100 ml (78-122) and -6 ml (-29-17), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: DXA is superior in repeatability when compared to CM and WD for VM, especially for the BCRL arm but also the contralateral arm.
BACKGROUND: Following treatment for breast cancer 12%-60% develop breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL). There are several ways of assessing BCRL. Circumference measurement (CM) and water displacement (WD) for volume measurements (VM) are frequently used methods in practice and research, respectively. The aim of this study was to evaluate CM and WD for VM of the BCRL arm and the contralateral arm, comparing the results with regional dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA). METHODS AND RESULTS: Twenty-four women with unilateral BCRL were included in the study. Blinded duplicate VM were obtained from both arms using the three methods mentioned above. CM and DXA were performed by two observers. WD was performed by a group of observers. Mean differences (d) in duplicated volumes, limits of agreement (LOA), and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for each method. The repeatability expressed as d (95% CI) between the duplicated VM of the BCRL arm and the contralateral arm was for DXA 3 ml (-6-11) and 3 ml (1-7), respectively. For CM and WD, the d (95% CI) of the BCRL arm were 107 ml (86-127) and 26 ml (-26-79), respectively and in the contralateral arm 100 ml (78-122) and -6 ml (-29-17), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: DXA is superior in repeatability when compared to CM and WD for VM, especially for the BCRL arm but also the contralateral arm.
Authors: Prue Cormie; Kate Pumpa; Daniel A Galvão; Elizabeth Turner; Nigel Spry; Christobel Saunders; Yvonne Zissiadis; Robert U Newton Journal: J Cancer Surviv Date: 2013-04-20 Impact factor: 4.442
Authors: Bryan Spinelli; Michael J Kallan; Xiaochen Zhang; Andrea Cheville; Andrea Troxel; Joy Cohn; Lorraine Dean; Kathleen Sturgeon; Margaret Evangelista; Zi Zhang; David Ebaugh; Kathryn H Schmitz Journal: Arch Phys Med Rehabil Date: 2018-10-04 Impact factor: 3.966
Authors: Pedro Ciudad; Antonio J Forte; Maria T Huayllani; Daniel Boczar; Oscar J Manrique; Samyd S Bustos; Atenas Bustamante; Hung-Chi Chen Journal: Gland Surg Date: 2020-04
Authors: Kira Bloomquist; Sandi Hayes; Lis Adamsen; Tom Møller; Karl Bach Christensen; Bent Ejlertsen; Peter Oturai Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2016-07-22 Impact factor: 4.430
Authors: Kira Bloomquist; Peter Oturai; Megan L Steele; Lis Adamsen; Tom Møller; Karl Bang Christensen; Bent Ejlertsen; Sandra C Hayes Journal: Med Sci Sports Exerc Date: 2018-02 Impact factor: 5.411