The relationship between lymphedema severity and awareness of lymphedema surgery

Background During the early stages of lymphedema, active physiologic surgical treatment can be applied. However, lymphedema patients often have limited knowledge and misconceptions regarding lymphedema and surgical treatment. We analyzed the correlations between lymphedema severity and surgical technique according to patients’ awareness of surgical treatment for secondary upper extremity lymphedema (UEL).

Methods Patients with UEL diagnosed between December 2017 and December 2019 were retrospectively evaluated. At the time of their presentation to our hospital for the treatment of lymphedema, they were administered a questionnaire about lymphedema and lymphedema surgery. Based on the results, patients were classified as being aware or unaware of surgical treatment. Lymphedema severity was classified according to the arm dermal backflow (ADB) stage and the MD Anderson Cancer Center (MDACC) stage based on indocyanine green lymphography conducted at presentation. Surgical techniques were compared between the two groups.

Results Patients who were aware of surgical treatment had significantly lower initial ADB and MDACC stages (P<0.05) and more frequently underwent physiologic procedures than excisional procedures (P=0.003).

Conclusions If patients are actively educated regarding surgical treatment of lymphedema, physiologic procedures may be performed during the early stages of UEL.

Keywords

Breast cancer lymphedema - Upper extremity - Lymphography - Awareness

This article was presented as an oral presentation at the PRS Korea 2019 conference on November 8-10, 2019, in Seoul, Korea.

Publication History

Received: 12 November 2020

Accepted: 27 May 2021

Article published online:
19 March 2022

• REFERENCES

• 1 Kataru RP, Cuzzone DA, Mehrara BJ. Pathology of lymphedema.. In: Gurtner GC, Neligan PC. Plastic surgery e-book. 1. 4th ed. London: Elsevier Health Sciences; 2017: 515-28
• 2 Boyages J, Kalfa S, Xu Y. et al. Worse and worse off: the impact of lymphedema on work and career after breast cancer. Springerplus 2016; 5: 657
• 3 Sosin M, Yin C, Poysophon P. et al. Understanding the concepts and physiologic principles of lymphatic microsurgery. J Reconstr Microsurg 2016; 32: 571-9
• 4 Matsuura Y, Kawagoe T, Toki N. et al. Long-standing complications after treatment for cancer of the uterine cervix: clinical significance of medical examination at 5 years after treatment. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2006; 16: 294-7
• 5 McLaughlin SA, Wright MJ, Morris KT. et al. Prevalence of lymphedema in women with breast cancer 5 years after sentinel lymph node biopsy or axillary dissection: objective measurements. J Clin Oncol 2008; 26: 5213-9
• 6 Kim K, Kim IJ, Pak K. et al. The feasibility of quantitative parameters of lymphoscintigraphy without significant dermal backflow for the evaluation of lymphedema in post-operative patients with breast cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2020; 47: 1094-102
• 7 Bozkurt M, Palmer LJ, Guo Y. Effectiveness of decongestive lymphatic therapy in patients with lymphedema resulting from breast cancer treatment regardless of previous lymphedema treatment. Breast J 2017; 23: 154-8
• 8 Patel KM, Manrique O, Sosin M. et al. Lymphatic mapping and lymphedema surgery in the breast cancer patient. Gland Surg 2015; 4: 244-56
• 9 Patel KM, Lin CY, Cheng MH. From theory to evidence: long-term evaluation of the mechanism of action and flap integration of distal vascularized lymph node transfers. J Reconstr Microsurg 2015; 31: 26-30
• 10 Seth AK, Vargas CR, Chuang DJ. et al. Readability assessment of patient information about lymphedema and its treatment. Plast Reconstr Surg 2016; 137: 287e-295e
• 11 Fahradyan A, El-Sabawi B, Patel KM. Understanding patient expectations of lymphedema surgery. Plast Reconstr Surg 2018; 141: 1550-7
• 12 Narushima M, Yamamoto T, Ogata F. et al. Indocyanine green lymphography findings in limb lymphedema. J Reconstr Microsurg 2016; 32: 72-9
• 13 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
• 14 DiSipio T, Rye S, Newman B. et al. Incidence of unilateral arm lymphoedema after breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Oncol 2013; 14: 500-15
• 15 Tsai RJ, Dennis LK, Lynch CF. et al. The risk of developing arm lymphedema among breast cancer survivors: a meta-analysis of treatment factors. Ann Surg Oncol 2009; 16: 1959-72
• 16 Nielsen I, Gordon S, Selby A. Breast cancer-related lymphoedema risk reduction advice: a challenge for health professionals. Cancer Treat Rev 2008; 34: 621-8
• 17 American Cancer Society. Breast cancer facts & figures 2013–2014. Atlanta. American Cancer Society. 2013
• 18 Petrek JA, Senie RT, Peters M. et al. Lymphedema in a cohort of breast carcinoma survivors 20 years after diagnosis. Cancer 2001; 92: 1368-77
• 19 Ciudad P, Sabbagh MD, Agko M. et al. Surgical management of lower extremity lymphedema: a comprehensive review. Indian J Plast Surg 2019; 52: 81-92
• 20 Maclellan RA, Couto RA, Sullivan JE. et al. Management of primary and secondary lymphedema: analysis of 225 referrals to a center. Ann Plast Surg 2015; 75: 197-200
• 21 Mihara M, Hara H, Araki J. et al. Indocyanine green (ICG) lymphography is superior to lymphoscintigraphy for diagnostic imaging of early lymphedema of the upper limbs. PLoS One 2012; 7: e38182
• 22 Mikami T, Hosono M, Yabuki Y. et al. Classification of lymphoscintigraphy and relevance to surgical indication for lymphaticovenous anastomosis in upper limb lymphedema. Lymphology 2011; 44: 155-67
• 23 Yoon JA, Shin MJ, Shin YB. et al. Correlation of ICG lymphography and lymphoscintigraphy severity stage in secondary upper limb lymphedema. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2020; 73: 1982-8