Literature DB >> 24834791

Side of cancer does not influence limb volumes in women prior to breast cancer surgery.

Betty Smoot1, Steven M Paul, Bradley E Aouizerat, Charles Elboim, Jon D Levine, Gary Abrams, Deborah Hamolsky, John Neuhaus, Brian Schmidt, Claudia West, Kimberly Topp, Christine Miaskowski.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Understanding normal volume asymmetry is essential for accurate assessment of limb volume changes following breast cancer (BC) treatment in which lymphatic function is disrupted. The purposes of this study were to evaluate for differences in dominant and nondominant limb volumes and to evaluate for interactions between the effects of dominance and side of cancer on limb volume. METHODS AND
RESULTS: This study evaluated preoperative limb volumes of 397 women enrolled in a prospective, longitudinal study of neuropathic pain and lymphedema. Volume was calculated from circumference. Limb resistance was measured with bioimpedance. Women were dichotomized into two groups: those whose cancer was on their dominant side and those whose cancer was on their nondominant side. Analyses of variance were used to evaluate for differences. In 47%, BC occurred on the side of the dominant limb. Except for the 30 to 40 centimeter (cm) limb volume segment, a main effect of dominance was found for all measures. The volume of the dominant limb was significantly greater than that of the nondominant limb. No main effects were found for side of cancer. A statistically significant interaction was found only at the 0 to 10 cm limb volume segment.
CONCLUSIONS: Prior to BC treatment, the dominant limb demonstrated lower bioimpedance resistance (-2.09%) and greater total limb volume (1.12%) than the nondominant limb. Segmental volume differences were greatest at the proximal forearm segment (2.31%) and least at the proximal arm segment (0.21%). This study provides evidence that preoperative volume assessment is important due to normal variability associated with limb dominance.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24834791      PMCID: PMC4171111          DOI: 10.1089/lrb.2013.0038

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Lymphat Res Biol        ISSN: 1539-6851            Impact factor:   2.589


  20 in total

1.  Quantitative bioimpedance spectroscopy for the assessment of lymphoedema.

Authors:  L C Ward; S Czerniec; S L Kilbreath
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2008-12-11       Impact factor: 4.872

Review 2.  Incidence of unilateral arm lymphoedema after breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Tracey DiSipio; Sheree Rye; Beth Newman; Sandi Hayes
Journal:  Lancet Oncol       Date:  2013-03-27       Impact factor: 41.316

3.  Differences in depression, anxiety, and quality of life between women with and without breast pain prior to breast cancer surgery.

Authors:  Maria Kyranou; Steven M Paul; Laura B Dunn; Kathleen Puntillo; Bradley E Aouizerat; Gary Abrams; Deborah Hamolsky; Claudia West; John Neuhaus; Bruce Cooper; Christine Miaskowski
Journal:  Eur J Oncol Nurs       Date:  2012-08-11       Impact factor: 2.398

4.  Comparison of relative versus absolute arm size change as criteria for quantifying breast cancer-related lymphedema: the flaws in current studies and need for universal methodology.

Authors:  Marek Ancukiewicz; Cynthia L Miller; Melissa N Skolny; Jean O'Toole; Laura E Warren; Lauren S Jammallo; Michelle C Specht; Alphonse G Taghian
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2012-06-19       Impact factor: 4.872

5.  Segmental limb volume change as a predictor of the onset of lymphedema in women with early breast cancer.

Authors:  Nicole L Stout; Lucinda A Pfalzer; Ellen Levy; Charles McGarvey; Barbara Springer; Lynn H Gerber; Peter Soballe
Journal:  PM R       Date:  2011-10-05       Impact factor: 2.298

6.  Normative volume difference between the dominant and nondominant upper limbs in healthy older women.

Authors:  E S Dylke; J Yee; L C Ward; N Foroughi; S L Kilbreath
Journal:  Lymphat Res Biol       Date:  2012-12       Impact factor: 2.589

7.  Assessment of breast cancer-related arm lymphedema--comparison of physical measurement methods and self-report.

Authors:  S A Czerniec; L C Ward; K M Refshauge; J Beith; M J Lee; S York; S L Kilbreath
Journal:  Cancer Invest       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 2.176

8.  Differences in sleep disturbance, fatigue and energy levels between women with and without breast pain prior to breast cancer surgery.

Authors:  Christina Van Onselen; Bradley E Aouizerat; Laura B Dunn; Steven M Paul; Claudia West; Deborah Hamolsky; Kathryn Lee; Michelle Melisko; John Neuhaus; Christine Miaskowski
Journal:  Breast       Date:  2012-08-01       Impact factor: 4.380

9.  Identification of patient subgroups and risk factors for persistent breast pain following breast cancer surgery.

Authors:  Christine Miaskowski; Bruce Cooper; Steven M Paul; Claudia West; Dale Langford; Jon D Levine; Gary Abrams; Deborah Hamolsky; Laura Dunn; Marylin Dodd; John Neuhaus; Christina Baggott; Anand Dhruva; Brian Schmidt; Janine Cataldo; John Merriman; Bradley E Aouizerat
Journal:  J Pain       Date:  2012-12       Impact factor: 5.820

10.  Lymphatic and angiogenic candidate genes predict the development of secondary lymphedema following breast cancer surgery.

Authors:  Christine Miaskowski; Marylin Dodd; Steven M Paul; Claudia West; Deborah Hamolsky; Gary Abrams; Bruce A Cooper; Charles Elboim; John Neuhaus; Brian L Schmidt; Betty Smoot; Bradley E Aouizerat
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-04-16       Impact factor: 3.240

View more
  1 in total

1.  Prospective surveillance of breast cancer-related lymphoedema in the first-year post-surgery: feasibility and comparison of screening measures.

Authors:  J M Blaney; G McCollum; J Lorimer; J Bradley; R Kennedy; J P Rankin
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2014-11-16       Impact factor: 3.603

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.