Su-Fen Liao1, Shu-Hua Li, Hsin-Ya Huang. 1. Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Changhua Christian Hospital, 135 Nanxiao Street, Changhua 500, Taiwan. sueliao3@gmail.com
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to estimate the efficacy of an intensive CDP program, as well as to identify the predictors associated with lymphedema severity and response to CDP in lower limb lymphedema (LLL) after pelvic cancer therapy. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of post-pelvic cancer LLL patients that were treated with a CDP program between January 2004 and March 2011. RESULTS: Twenty-seven (61.4%) of the total 44 patients had cervical cancer, 9 (20.5%) had endometrial cancer, and 8 (18.2%) had ovarian cancer. The mean age was 62.2 years, 18 (40.9%) patients received radiotherapy and a mean of 12.6 sessions of daily CDP, and mean lymphedema duration was 34.8 months. The interval from pelvic cancer treatment to LLL development was 63.4 months. Lymphedema severity, baseline and post-CDP percentage of excess volume (PEV) were 32.9% ± 18.4% and 18.8%± 16.7%. Baseline PEV was not correlated with duration of lymphedema, number of CDP sessions, age or radiotherapy, and was significantly different to post-CDP PEV (p<0.001). CDP efficacy, percentage reduction of excess volume (PREV), was -55.1%, and was correlated with baseline PEV, but not with the number of CDP sessions, duration of lymphedema, or age. PEV (p<0.001) was the only predictive factor for CDP efficacy. CONCLUSIONS: The key to predicting successful lymphedema treatment of LLL is the initial PEV. The intensive CDP program was effective and successful. We should encourage and refer patients to undergo treatment for LLL, even when the LLL is mild.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to estimate the efficacy of an intensive CDP program, as well as to identify the predictors associated with lymphedema severity and response to CDP in lower limb lymphedema (LLL) after pelvic cancer therapy. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of post-pelvic cancer LLL patients that were treated with a CDP program between January 2004 and March 2011. RESULTS: Twenty-seven (61.4%) of the total 44 patients had cervical cancer, 9 (20.5%) had endometrial cancer, and 8 (18.2%) had ovarian cancer. The mean age was 62.2 years, 18 (40.9%) patients received radiotherapy and a mean of 12.6 sessions of daily CDP, and mean lymphedema duration was 34.8 months. The interval from pelvic cancer treatment to LLL development was 63.4 months. Lymphedema severity, baseline and post-CDP percentage of excess volume (PEV) were 32.9% ± 18.4% and 18.8%± 16.7%. Baseline PEV was not correlated with duration of lymphedema, number of CDP sessions, age or radiotherapy, and was significantly different to post-CDP PEV (p<0.001). CDP efficacy, percentage reduction of excess volume (PREV), was -55.1%, and was correlated with baseline PEV, but not with the number of CDP sessions, duration of lymphedema, or age. PEV (p<0.001) was the only predictive factor for CDP efficacy. CONCLUSIONS: The key to predicting successful lymphedema treatment of LLL is the initial PEV. The intensive CDP program was effective and successful. We should encourage and refer patients to undergo treatment for LLL, even when the LLL is mild.
Authors: Shirin M Shallwani; Anna Towers; Anne Newman; Shannon Salvador; Angela Yung; Lucy Gilbert; Walter H Gotlieb; Xing Zeng; Doneal Thomas Journal: Curr Oncol Date: 2021-01-13 Impact factor: 3.677
Authors: Devarati Mitra; Paul J Catalano; Nicole Cimbak; Antonio L Damato; Michael G Muto; Akila N Viswanathan Journal: J Gynecol Oncol Date: 2015-10-08 Impact factor: 4.401