Ávila, Francisco R.

AbstractBackgroundVascularized omental lymphatic transplant (VOLT) is an increasingly popular treatment of extremity lymphedema given its promising donor site. While the success of VOLT in the treatment of lymphedema has been reported previously, several questions remain.AimTo further elucidate appropriate use of VOLT in the treatment of lymphedema, specifically addressing patient selection, harvest technique, and operative methods.Methods and ResultsA systematic review of VOLT for upper extremity lymphedema was performed. Of 115 yield studies, seven were included for analysis based on inclusion and exclusion criteria. Included studies demonstrated significant reductions in extremity circumference/volume (average volume reduction, 22.7%‐39.5%) as well as subjective improvements using patient‐reported outcomes. Though studies are heterogenous and limited, when analyzed in aggregate, suggest the efficacy of VOLT in lymphedema treatment.ConclusionThis is the largest systematic review of VOLT to date. VOLT continues to show promise as a safe and efficacious surgical intervention for lymphedema in the upper extremity. Further studies are warranted to more definitively identify patients for whom this technique is appropriate as well as ideal harvest and inset technique.

AbstractBackgroundIn recent years, magnetic resonance imaging lymphangiography (MRL) has emerged as a way to predict if patients are candidates for lymphedema surgery, particularly lymphovenous anastomosis (LVA). Our goal was to conduct a systematic review of the literature on the use of MRL for preoperative planning in lymphedema surgery. We hypothesized that MRL could add valuable information to the standard preoperative evaluation of lymphedema patients.MethodsOn February 17, 2020, we conducted a systematic review of the PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Clinical Answers, and Embase databases, without time frame or language limitations, to identify articles on the use of MRL for preoperative planning of lymphedema surgery. We excluded studies that investigated other applications of magnetic resonance imaging, such as lymphedema diagnosis and treatment evaluation. The primary outcome was the examination capacity to identify lymphatic anatomy and the secondary outcome was the presence of adverse effects.ResultsOf 372 potential articles identified with the search, nine studies fulfilled the eligibility criteria. A total of 334 lymphedema patients were enrolled in these studies. Two studies compared MRL findings with those of other standard examinations (indocyanine green lymphography [ICG‐L] or lymphoscintigraphy). No adverse effects due to MRL were reported. A study shown that MRL had higher sensitivity to detect lymphatic vessel abnormalities compared with lymphoscintigraphy and a statistically higher chance of successful LVA was observed when the results of MRL agreed with those of ICG‐L (p < .001).ConclusionsMRL could be useful for preoperative planning in lymphedema surgery. The scientific evidence has been limited, so further studies with greater numbers of patients and cost analysis are necessary to justify the addition of MRL to current preoperative protocols.

BACKGROUND: Bioimpedance spectroscopy has been suggested as a useful tool for early diagnosis of breast cancer–related lymphedema (BCRL). We aimed to describe the outcomes of published studies that evaluated bioimpedance analysis as a method for prospective surveillance and early diagnosis of BCRL. METHODS: We queried the PubMed, Ovid Medline, and EMBASE databases to identify studies that evaluated use of bioimpedance spectroscopy as a diagnostic tool. We used the keywords “bioimpedance” AND (“lymphedema” OR “lymphoedema”) in the search. Only English-language studies that reported quantitative outcomes for patients with BCRL were included. RESULTS: Of 152, 235 and 116 identified articles in PubMed, Ovid Medline and EMBASE databases, only 22 were included. Use of bioimpedance analysis for prospective surveillance has been shown to prevent chronic BCRL. All the cross-sectional and retrospective studies that evaluated bioimpedance for diagnosis of BCRL reported significantly different L-Dex scores between lymphedema patients and healthy participants; in addition, bioimpedance scores were positively correlated with volume of lymphedema. CONCLUSION: Bioimpedance analysis is a potential tool with demonstrated benefits for prevention of chronic BCRL and may be an economic and great alternative for early diagnosis of BCRL.

Objetivo: Evaluar una serie de biomarcadores que permiten medir el proceso de cicatrización de las heridas e identificar los materiales que fueron utilizados para realizar dicha medición, teniendo en cuenta su incorporación en apósitos inteligentes. Método: Se realizó una revisión sistemática a partir de PubMed, Medline, CINAHL y Embase, sobre estudios que evaluaran el uso de materiales sensibles a biomarcadores. Se incluyeron estudios en inglés, sin tomar en cuenta el estado o fecha de publicación. No se incluyeron artículos de revisión ni sinopsis de conferencias. Resultados: La búsqueda mostró 296 estudios. Un investigador seleccionó 19 artículos para su inclusión. Todos los estudios fueron experimentales. Se encontraron artículos que evaluaron pH, tensión de oxígeno, temperatura, presión, ácido úrico, y glucosa. Los materiales utilizados fueron hidrogeles, fibras y tintas conductivas. Conclusión: El biomarcador más estudiado fue el pH. Los materiales que evalúan biomarcadores por medio de métodos colorimétricos podrían ser los más adecuados para su incorporación en apósitos inteligentes. Conflicto de interés: Este estudio fue respaldado, en parte, por el centro de Medicina Individualizada de Mayo Clinic, y por la Fundación de Cirugía Plástica (Plastic Surgery Foundation).