| Literature DB >> 33402768 |
Ashok Basur Chandrappa1, Ritu Batth1, Srikanth Vasudevan1, Anantheswar Yellambalase N1, Dinkar Sreekumar1.
Abstract
Background Indocyanine green (ICG) lymphangiography is being increasingly employed to assess the severity of lymphedema, locate the areas of patent linear lymphatics and dermal backflow and plan treatment. This study suggests a novel method of reporting ICG findings in extremities to enable easy understanding among surgeons and physiotherapists and avoid repeat testing when a patient visits a disparate lymphedema center or clinician. Methods A reporting protocol was developed in the lymphedema clinic of the plastic surgery department, and patients were asked to bring along the report in every subsequent review. The ICG findings were recorded on the fluorescence imaging system as well. The report was prepared by one and analyzed by two different clinicians without repeating the test on 10 consecutive patients. Results The interrater reliability of findings in the report was found to be 98.7% among the three clinicians. Conclusion The reporting system was found to be illustratable and reproducible. Association of Plastic Surgeons of India. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial-License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).Entities:
Keywords: ICG reporting; lymphedema; standardization
Year: 2020 PMID: 33402768 PMCID: PMC7775219 DOI: 10.1055/s-0040-1716436
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Indian J Plast Surg ISSN: 0970-0358
Fig. 1Lymphedema classification based on ICG lymphangiography (Source: Chang DW, Suami H, Skoracki R. A prospective analysis of 100 consecutive lymphovenous bypass cases for treatment of extremity lymphedema. Plast Reconstr Surg 2013; 132:1305–14).
Fig. 2Linear lymphatics.
Fig. 3Splash pattern of dermal backflow.
Fig. 4Stardust pattern of dermal backflow.
Fig. 5Diffuse pattern of dermal backflow.
Description of the limb zones
| Zone/wrist/ankle | Distance from wrist/ankle (cm) |
|---|---|
| Midpalm/midfoot | Midpalm/midfoot |
| W/A | 0 |
| Z1 | 4 |
| Z2 | 8 |
| Z3 | 12 |
| Z4 | 16 |
| Z5 | 20 |
| Z6 | 24 |
| Z7 | 28 |
| Z8 | 32 |
| Z9 | 36 |
| Z10 | 40 |
| Z11 | 44 |
| Z12 | 48 |
| Z13 | 52 |
| Z14 | 56 |
Fig. 6Marking the zones in upper limbs.
The proposed four-component reporting code
| Finding | Right/Left | Flexor/Extensor surface | Zone | Border | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| L = lateral; M = medial; R = radial; U = ulnar. | |||||
| Linear lymphatics | R/L | F/E | Zx | R/U/M/L | |
| Splash | |||||
| Stardust | |||||
| Diffuse | |||||
| Blank | |||||
Fig. 7The proposed reporting system sheet.