| Literature DB >> 31964116 |
Indri Aulia1, Eva Chintia Yessica1.
Abstract
Genital lymphedema (GL) is an uncommon and disabling disease that manifests as enlargement of the genital region resulting from the disturbance of lymphatic drainage. Although conservative treatment such as decompression is typically the first-line approach, surgical intervention has been shown to be effective in certain cases. This study aimed to systematically review studies evaluating available surgical alternatives for the treatment of male GL. A systematic search strategy using keyword and subject headings was applied to PubMed, Scopus, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library in May 2019. Studies investigating various surgical techniques to treat penile and scrotal lymphedema were included. The potential risk of bias of included trials was evaluated using the methodological index for non-randomized studies (MINORS). In total, 13 studies met the inclusion criteria, nine of which were determined to be high-quality. The average MINORS score was 12.45 for studies involving excision and 14 for studies involving lymphovenous anastomosis (LVA). The most common reason for a low score was a failure to describe the inclusion criteria. Recurrence of lymphedema during follow-up was reported in four studies involving excision and in no studies involving LVA. In general, the quality of the included literature was considered to be fair. Although surgical intervention might not always prevent the recurrence of lymphedema, all of the studies reported improved quality of life after the procedure. This study could be used as the basis for evidence-based guidelines to be applied in clinical practice for managing male GL.Entities:
Keywords: Genital lymphedema; Penile lymphedema; Scrotal lymphedema; Surgical procedure
Year: 2020 PMID: 31964116 PMCID: PMC6976747 DOI: 10.5999/aps.2019.01123
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Arch Plast Surg ISSN: 2234-6163
Fig. 1.Process of study selection in this review
Characteristics of the reviewed studies
| Study | Year | Country | No. of subjects | Mean age (yr) | Etiology |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Scaglioni et al. [ | 2018 | Switzerland | 1 | 51 | Malignancy |
| Vives et al. [ | 2016 | Colombia | 1 | 33 | Filariasis |
| Pastor et al. [ | 2011 | USA | 1 | 39 | Epididymitis |
| Garaffa et al. [ | 2008 | UK | 34 | 46.6 | Idiopathic, infection, malignancy |
| Halperin et al. [ | 2007 | USA | 2 | 42.5 | Idiopathic |
| Machol et al. [ | 2014 | USA | 4 | 35 | Infection |
| Thejeswi et al. [ | 2012 | India | 1 | 54 | Filariasis |
| Elkiran et al. [ | 2019 | Egypt | 1 | 21 | Inflammation |
| Torio-Padron et al. [ | 2015 | Germany | 51 | 41 | Filariasis, malignancy |
| Modolin et al. [ | 2006 | Brazil | 17 | 50.5 | Filariasis, malignancy, congenital |
| Salako et al. [ | 2018 | Nigeria | 11 | 48.5 | Filariasis |
| Mukenge et al. [ | 2007 | Italy | 1 | 75 | Malignancy |
| Mukenge et al. [ | 2011 | Italy | 5 | 74.2 | Malignancy |
Quality assessment of the reviewed studies
| Study | Aim | Inclusion of consecutive patients | Prospective collection of data | Endpoints appropriate to the aim of the study | Unbiased assessment of the study endpoint | Follow-up period appropriate to the aim of the study | Loss to follow-up <5% | Prospective calculation of the study size | Adequate control group | Baseline equivalence of groups | Adequate statistical analyses | Total score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Scaglioni et al. [ | 2 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 11 |
| Vives et al. [ | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 10 |
| Pastor et al. [ | 2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 |
| Garaffa et al. [ | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 16 |
| Halperin et al. [ | 2 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 13 |
| Machol et al. [ | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 16 |
| Thejeswi et al. [ | 2 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 8 |
| Elkiran et al. [ | 2 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 12 |
| Torio-Padron et al. [ | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 16 |
| Modolin et al. [ | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 16 |
| Salako et al. [ | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 14 |
| Mukenge et al. [ | 2 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 12 |
| Mukenge et al. [ | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 16 |
Extracted data from the reviewed studies
| Study | Site | Technique | Follow-up duration | Clinical outcomes | Quality of life | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Early complications | Late complications | Tool used | Results | ||||
| Scaglioni et al. [ | Penis and scrotum | Excision | 6 mon | None | None | NR | Improved daily activity and penile erection |
| Vives et al. [ | Penis and scrotum | Excision and flaps | 1 yr 1 mon | None | None | NR | Improved daily activity and sexual function |
| Pastor et al. [ | Scrotum | Excision | NR | NR | NR | NR | NR |
| Garaffa et al. [ | Penis and scrotum | Penis: local excision, FTSG | 2 yr 3 mon | None | Hypertrophic scars, keloids, and contracture (STSG patients) | NR | Improved daily activity and sexual function |
| Scrotum: partial scrotectomy | |||||||
| Halperin et al. [ | Penis and scrotum | Excision and local flaps | 6 mon | Cellulitis | None | NR | Improved ambulation, sexual function, and hygiene, and could void in standing position |
| Machol et al. [ | Scrotum | Excision and lateral flaps or STSG | 3 yr | Wound dehiscence, infection | Recurrence | NR | Improved penile erection and sexual function |
| Thejeswi et al. [ | Scrotum | Excision, skin flaps | NR | Wound infection | None | NR | Improved mobility |
| Elkiran et al. [ | Scrotum | Excision, anterior-posterior flaps | 1 yr | None | None | NR | Improved daily activity and cosmetic outcomes |
| Torio-Padron et al. | Scrotum | Excision (no flaps or skin grafts) | NR | Scrotal hematoma (4%), dehiscence (2%) | Recurrence (10%) | Glasgow Benefit Inventory | Improved general function and physical well-being |
| Modolin et al. [ | Penis and scrotum | Modified Charles procedure | 6 mon 6 yr | None | 1 patient w/ malignancy recurrence | NR | Improved ambulation, sexual function, and hygiene, and could void in standing position |
| Salako et al. [ | Scrotum | Modified Charles procedure | 2 yr | Scrotal hematoma (27.3%), infection (18.2%) | Recurrence (9.1%) | NR | Improved ambulation and could void in standing position |
| Mukenge et al. [ | Scrotum | End-to-side LVA | 1 yr | None | None | NR | Improved sexual function |
| Mukenge et al. [ | Scrotum | LVA with latero-lateral or termino-lateral anastomoses | 1 yr | None | None | NR | Improved daily activity and cosmetic outcomes |
NR, not reported; FTSG, full-thickness skin graft; STSG, split-thickness skin graft; LVA, lymphovenous anastomosis.