Magnus J Chun1, Fouad Saeg1, Anna Meade2, Taruni Kumar1, Eman A Toraih3, Abigail E Chaffin1, Christopher Homsy4. 1. Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Tulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, LA, 70112. 2. Department of Plastic Surgery, University of Texas-Southwestern, Dallas, TX, 75390. 3. Department of Surgery, Tulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, LA, 70112; Department of Histology and Cell Biology, Genetics Unit, Faculty of Medicine, Suez Canal University, Ismailia, 41522, Egypt. 4. Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Tufts Medical Center, Boston, MA, 02111. Electronic address: chomsy@tuftsmedicalcenter.org.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Secondary lymphedema remains one of the most notorious complications of axillary and pelvic lymph node surgery following mastectomy. There is a lack of high-level evidence found on the effectiveness of immediate lymphatic reconstruction (ILR) in preventing secondary lymphedema. This meta-analysis evaluates the outcomes of ILR for prevention of secondary lymphedema in patients undergoing different surgeries, and provides suggestions for lymphatic microsurgical preventive healing approach (LYMPHA). METHODS: A review of PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science was performed according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses guidelines. All English-language studies published from January 1, 2009 to June 1, 2020 were included. We excluded non-ILR interventions, literature reviews/letters/commentaries, and nonhuman or cadaver studies. A total of 789 patients that were enrolled in 13 studies were included in our one-arm meta-analysis. RESULTS: A total of 13 studies (n=789) met inclusion criteria: upper extremity ILR (n=665) and lower extremity ILR (n=124). The overall incidence of lymphedema for upper extremity ILR was 2.7% (95%CI: 1.1%-4.4%) and lower extremity ILR was 3.6% (95%CI: 0.3%-10.1%). For upper extremity ILR, the average follow-up time was 11.6 ± 7.8 months and the LE incidence appeared to be the highest approximately 1 to 2 years postoperation. CONCLUSIONS: Lymphedema is a common complication in cancer treatment. ILR, especially LYMPHA, may be an effective technique to facilitate lymphatic drainage at the time of the index procedure but future studies will be required to show its short-term efficacy and long-term outcomes.
BACKGROUND: Secondary lymphedema remains one of the most notorious complications of axillary and pelvic lymph node surgery following mastectomy. There is a lack of high-level evidence found on the effectiveness of immediate lymphatic reconstruction (ILR) in preventing secondary lymphedema. This meta-analysis evaluates the outcomes of ILR for prevention of secondary lymphedema in patients undergoing different surgeries, and provides suggestions for lymphatic microsurgical preventive healing approach (LYMPHA). METHODS: A review of PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science was performed according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses guidelines. All English-language studies published from January 1, 2009 to June 1, 2020 were included. We excluded non-ILR interventions, literature reviews/letters/commentaries, and nonhuman or cadaver studies. A total of 789 patients that were enrolled in 13 studies were included in our one-arm meta-analysis. RESULTS: A total of 13 studies (n=789) met inclusion criteria: upper extremity ILR (n=665) and lower extremity ILR (n=124). The overall incidence of lymphedema for upper extremity ILR was 2.7% (95%CI: 1.1%-4.4%) and lower extremity ILR was 3.6% (95%CI: 0.3%-10.1%). For upper extremity ILR, the average follow-up time was 11.6 ± 7.8 months and the LE incidence appeared to be the highest approximately 1 to 2 years postoperation. CONCLUSIONS: Lymphedema is a common complication in cancer treatment. ILR, especially LYMPHA, may be an effective technique to facilitate lymphatic drainage at the time of the index procedure but future studies will be required to show its short-term efficacy and long-term outcomes.