Breast lymphedema following breast-conserving treatment for breast cancer: current status and future directions.

PURPOSE: To examine the current evidence on breast lymphedema (BL) diagnosis and treatment after breast-conserving surgery, identify gaps in the literature, and propose future research directions. METHODS: A comprehensive literature review was conducted using Ovid, PubMed, and Cochrane, including studies published between 2000 and 2023. References were reviewed manually for eligible studies. Inclusion criteria were as follows: patients who underwent breast conserving treatment (surgery ± radiation) for breast cancer, goals of the paper included analyzing or reviewing BL measurement with ultrasound or tissue dielectric constant, or BL treatment. Twenty-seven manuscripts were included in the review. RESULTS: There is variation in incidence, time course, and risk factors for BL. Risk factors for BL included breast size, primary and axillary surgery extent, radiation, and chemotherapy but require further investigation. Diagnostic methods for BL currently rely on patient report and lack standardized criteria. Tissue dielectric constant (TDC) and ultrasound (US) emerged as promising ambulatory BL assessment tools; however, diagnostic thresholds and validation studies with ICG lymphography are needed to establish clinical utility. The evidence base for treatment of BL is weak, lacking high-quality studies. CONCLUSION: The natural history of BL is not well defined. TDC and US show promise as ambulatory assessment tools for BL; however, further validation with lymphatic imaging is required. BL treatment is not established in the literature. Longitudinal, prospective studies including pre-radiation measurements and validating with lymphatic imaging are required. These data will inform screening, diagnostic criteria, and evidence-based treatment parameters for patients with BL after breast-conserving surgery and radiation.

Impact of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on breast cancer-related lymphedema after axillary lymph node dissection: a retrospective cohort study.

PURPOSE: We aimed to evaluate whether neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) could be a risk factor for breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) associated with axillary lymph node dissection (ALND). PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 596 patients with cT0-4N0-3M0 breast cancer who underwent ALND and chemotherapy were retrospectively analyzed between March 2012 and March 2022. NAC was administered in 188 patients (31.5%), while up-front surgery in 408 (68.5%). Univariate and multivariable Cox regression analyses were performed to determine whether NAC was an independent risk factor for BCRL. With propensity score matching (PSM), the NAC group and up-front surgery group were matched 1:1 by age, body mass index (BMI), molecular subtypes, type of breast surgery, and the number of positive lymph nodes. Kaplan-Meier survival analyses were performed for BCRL between groups before and after PSM. Subgroup analyses were conducted to explore whether NAC differed for BCRL occurrence in people with different characteristics. RESULTS: At a median follow-up of 36.3 months, 130 patients (21.8%) experienced BCRL [NAC, 50/188 (26.60%) vs. up-front surgery, 80/408 (19.61%); P = 0.030]. Multivariable analysis identified that NAC [hazard ratio, 1.503; 95% CI (1.03, 2.19); P = 0.033] was an independent risk factor for BCRL. In addition, the hormone receptor-negative/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HR-/HER2-) subtype, breast-conserving surgery (BCS), and increased positive lymph nodes significantly increased BCRL risk. After PSM, NAC remained a risk factor for BCRL [hazard ratio, 1.896; 95% CI (1.18, 3.04); P = 0.007]. Subgroup analyses showed that NAC had a consistent BCRL risk in most clinical subgroups. CONCLUSION: NAC receipt has a statistically significant increase in BCRL risk in patients with ALND. These patients should be closely monitored and may benefit from early BCRL intervention.

Impact of risk factors, early rehabilitation and management of lymphedema associated with breast cancer: a retrospective study of breast Cancer survivors over 5 years.

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) is a potentially disabling and often irreversible consequence of breast cancer treatment, caused by the mechanical incompetence of the lymphatic system, resulting in reduced drainage capacity and functional overload due to an excessive volume of interstitial fluid surpassing the system's transport capacity in the arm. We wanted to determine the impact and explore the differences in independent risk factors for the occurrence of BCRL; incidence of BCRL over a five-year period at the Institute of Oncology Vojvodina in Sremska Kamenica and to answer the research question regarding the influence of the prehabilitation program on the overall incidence of BCRL during the observed five-year period. METHODS: From 2014 to 2018, a retrospective study was conducted at the Institute of Oncology of Vojvodina in Sremska Kamenica, analyzing female patients who had undergone breast cancer surgery. RESULTS: The study included 150 breast cancer patients who developed secondary lymphedema following surgery with the mean age of 59.2 ± 11.3 years. Fluctuations in hospitalization rates were observed over the five-year period, with the highest number of admissions in 2014 (24.0%) and a decline in 2018 (14.0%). The most common surgical procedure performed was left quadrantectomy (24.0%), followed by right quadrantectomy (20.0%) and left amputation (15.3%). The mean number of removed lymph nodes was 15.2 ± 6.1, with no statistically significant association between the number of removed lymph nodes and the manifestation of secondary lymphedema. The severity of secondary lymphedema varied based on patient age, with a higher incidence of moderate and severe lymphedema observed in patients aged 61 years and older. Patients who underwent radical surgery were more likely to experience severe lymphedema compared to those who had conservative surgery, although this difference was not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: In our study, the type of surgery, elapsed time since surgery, and the number of removed lymph nodes were not influencing factors for the occurrence of BCRL. However, concerning its severity, a greater number of systemic therapy modalities combined with radiotherapy were associated with a more frequent occurrence of mild and moderate BCRL. Also, the severity of BCRL varied among different age groups, with a higher incidence of moderate and severe lymphedema observed in patients aged 61 years and older. Ultimately, improving the quality of life for individuals affected by secondary lymphedema remains a crucial goal in the field of oncology.

Efficacy of Immediate Lymphatic Reconstruction to Decrease Incidence of Breast Cancer-related Lymphedema: Preliminary Results of Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To conduct a randomized controlled trial (RCT) on the efficacy of immediate lymphatic reconstruction (ILR) for decreasing the incidence of breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) after axillary lymph node dissection (ALND). BACKGROUND: Despite encouraging results in small studies, an appropriately powered RCT on ILR has not been performed. METHODS: Women undergoing ALND for breast cancer were randomized in the operating room 1:1 to either ILR, if technically feasible, or no ILR (control). The ILR group underwent lymphatic anastomosis to a regional vein using microsurgical techniques; control group had no repair and cut lymphatics were ligated. Relative volume change (RVC), bioimpedance, quality of life (QoL), and compression use were evaluated at baseline and every 6 months postoperatively up to 24 months. Indocyanine green (ICG) lymphography was performed at baseline and 12 and 24 months postoperatively. The primary outcome was the incidence of BCRL, defined as ≥10% RVC from baseline in the affected extremity at 12-, 18-, or 24-month follow-up. RESULTS: Of 72 patients randomized to ILR and 72 to control from January 2020 to March 2023, our preliminary analysis includes 99 patients with 12-month follow-up, 70 with 18-month follow-up, and 40 with 24-month follow-up. The cumulative incidence of BCRL was 9.5% in the ILR group and 32% in the control group ( P =0.014). The ILR group had lower bioimpedance values, decreased compression usage, better lymphatic function on ICG lymphography, and better QoL than the control group. CONCLUSIONS: Preliminary results of our RCT show that ILR after ALND decreases BCRL incidence. Our goal is to finish the accrual of 174 patients with 24-month follow-up.

Risk factors for the development of severe breast cancer-related lymphedema: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Severe lymphedema presents a challenge in terms of treatment due to the significant formation of scar tissue that accompanies it. The aim of this study was to identify intraoperative and preoperative risk factors of severe lymphedema and to develop a nomogram for estimating the risk of severe lymphedema within 3 years of surgery. METHOD: Data was collected from a retrospective cohort of 326 patients with BCRL at the Zhejiang Cancer Hospital from November 2015 to November 2018. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis was conducted to identify predictive indicators of severe lymphedema. A nomogram was developed to further improve the clinical applicability. RESULTS: In the retrospective cohort, the ratio of severe/non-severe lymphedema within 3 years of surgery was 1:3. Independent risk factors for severe lymphedema were determined to be age, positive lymph nodes, interpectoral (Rotter's) lymph nodes (IPNs) dissection, and educational level. IPNs dissection was found to contribute greatly to the development of severe lymphedema with a higher odds ratio (7.76; 95% CI: 3.87-15.54) than other risk factors. A nomogram was developed by integrating age, positive lymph nodes, IPNs dissection, and educational level, which yielded a C-index of 0.810 and 0.681 in the training and validation cohort, respectively. This suggested a moderate performance of the nomogram in predicting the risk of severe lymphedema within 3 years of surgery. The cut-off values of the low-, medium- and high-risk probabilities were 0.0876 and 0.3498, and the severe lymphedema exhibited a significantly higher risk probability as compared with the non-severe lymphedema. CONCLUSION: This study identified the risk factors of severe lymphedema and highlighted the substantial contribution of IPNs dissection to the severity of lymphedema.

The Association between Breast Cancer Related Lymphedema and Area Deprivation Index.

BACKGROUND: Lymphedema affects up to 34% of patients after breast cancer treatment but remains underdiagnosed and undertreated. Here, we use area deprivation index (ADI), a measure of neighborhood socioeconomic disadvantage, to determine how socioeconomic status may affect risk for and diagnosis of breast cancer-related lymphedema. METHODS: Records of patients who underwent surgical treatment of breast cancer between 2017-2020 were examined. Patients' nine-digit ZIP codes were utilized to determine their deprivation level as a national ADI percentile, and those fitting into the most and least deprived quartiles were compared with evaluate lymphedema risk factors and incidence. RESULTS: A total of 1,333 breast cancer patients were included, 812 (61%) of whom resided within the most disadvantaged ADI quartile nationally, and 521 within the least disadvantaged quartile. The most deprived group had higher rates of diabetes, obesity, and regional breast cancer, and received more extensive surgeries (7.5% modified radical mastectomy vs 1.9%, p < 0.001) and chemotherapy compared with the least disadvantaged quartile. The most disadvantaged cohort were more often at extreme risk of lymphedema utilizing the Risk Assessment Tool Evaluating Lymphedema Risk (9.1% versus 2.5%, p < 0.001); however, the incidence of lymphedema diagnoses was not significantly higher (13% vs 12%, p > 0.9). Logistic regression showed that the most deprived ADI quartile had 44% lower odds of a lymphedema diagnosis in comparison to the least deprived quartile. CONCLUSION: Residing in more socioeconomically disadvantaged neighborhoods is associated with lower odds of a lymphedema diagnosis, despite higher rates of risk factors for lymphedema, suggesting significant underdiagnosis in this population.

Burden of lymphedema in long-term breast cancer survivors by race and age.

BACKGROUND: Risk assessment for breast cancer-related lymphedema has emphasized upper-limb symptoms and treatment-related risk factors. This article examined breast cancer-related lymphedema after surgery, overall and in association with broader demographic and clinical features. METHODS: The Carolina Breast Cancer Study phase 3 followed participants for breast cancer-related lymphedema from baseline (on average, 5 months after breast cancer diagnosis) to 7 years after diagnosis. Among 2645 participants, 552 self-reported lymphedema cases were identified. Time-to-lymphedema curves and inverse probability weighted conditional Cox proportional hazards model were used to evaluate whether demographics and clinical features were associated with breast cancer-related lymphedema. RESULTS: Point prevalence of breast cancer-related lymphedema was 6.8% at baseline, and 19.9% and 23.8% at 2 and 7 years after diagnosis, respectively. Most cases had lymphedema in the arm (88%-93%), whereas 14% to 27% presented in the trunk and/or breast. Beginning approximately 10 months after diagnosis, younger Black women had the highest risk of breast cancer-related lymphedema and older non-Black women had the lowest risk. Positive lymph node status, larger tumor size (>5 cm), and estrogen receptor-negative breast cancer, as well as established risk factors such as higher body mass index, removal of more than five lymph nodes, mastectomy, chemotherapy, and radiation therapy, were significantly associated with increased hazard (1.5- to 3.5-fold) of lymphedema. CONCLUSIONS: Findings highlight that hazard of breast cancer-related lymphedema differs by demographic characteristics and clinical features. These factors could be used to identify those at greatest need of lymphedema prevention and early intervention. LAY SUMMARY: In this study, the aim was to investigate breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) burden. This study found that risk of BCRL differs by race, age, and other characteristics.

Breast cancer-related lymphedema correlated with incidence of cellulitis and mortality.

BACKGROUND: This study investigated breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) and its correlation with the incidence of cellulitis and mortality in the National Health Insurance (NHI) database in Taiwan. METHODS: Between 2004 and 2014, the NHI database of patients with breast cancer who underwent surgical procedures, adjuvant therapies, BCRL, cellulitis, and mortality were retrospectively reviewed. Cox regression was used to calculate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for incidence of BCRL and cellulitis in different treatment groups. The associations of BCRL with the incidence of cellulitis and mortality were further analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier curve. RESULTS: Among 100 301 patients, 5464 (5.4%) developed BCRL with a median onset of 1.3 years. At a mean follow-up of 4.77 years, the incidence of cellulitis in the BCRL group (12.7%, 694/5464 patients) was significantly higher than in the no-BCRL group (2.73%, 2589/94 837 patients) (HR: 3.74; 95% CI: 3.43-4.08; p < 0.0001). At a mean follow-up of 5.77 years, the mortality rate in the cellulitis group (34.21%, 1123/3283 patients) was significantly greater than in the no-cellulitis group (16.29%, 15 804/97 018 patients) (HR: 1.17; 95% CI: 1.1-1.24; p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: BCRL had a significantly higher incidence of cellulitis and mortality.

[BREAST CANCER-RELATED LYMPHEDEMA: INCIDENCE AND RISK FACTORS, PREVENTIVE MEASURES AND TREATMENTS].

INTRODUCTION: Lymphedema is a pathological condition in which intercellular protein-rich fluid accumulates and leads over time to inflammation, adipose tissue hypertrophy and fibrosis. Secondary lymphedema is caused by injury or blockage of the lymphatic system and the main cause in the Western world is the treatment of a variety of cancers, the main one being breast cancer. Chronic arm edema after breast cancer surgery is a common problem with an estimated incidence of 1 in 5 patients after breast cancer treatment. In this article we review the main risk factors, approaches to reducing the risk of developing lymphedema after treatment for breast cancer and existing treatment protocols for lymphedema including the surgical innovations in this field and our experience in these innovative surgical approaches. To date, 26 physiological surgeries have been performed at the Tel Aviv Medical Center using the microsurgical approach for treating lymphedema. These surgeries had no significant complications and the improvement was observed to be greater in the group of patients with secondary lymphedema. Lymphovenous anastomosis and vascularized lymph node transfer offer promising solutions for the treatment of breast cancer related lymphedema. The introduction of additional techniques and the refinement of these procedures will probably continue to improve the results in the future.

Weight loss does not decrease risk of breast cancer-related arm lymphedema.

BACKGROUND: The goal of this study was to determine the relationship between postoperative weight change and breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL). METHODS: In this cohort study, 1161 women underwent unilateral breast surgery for breast cancer from 2005 to 2020 and were prospectively screened for BCRL. Arm volume measurements were obtained via an optoelectronic perometer preoperatively, postoperatively, and in the follow-up setting every 6 to 12 months. Mean follow-up from preoperative baseline was 49.1 months. The main outcome was BCRL, defined as a relative volume change of the ipsilateral arm of ≥10% at least 3 months after surgery. RESULTS: A total of 92 patients (7.9%) developed BCRL. Net weight loss versus net weight gain from baseline to last follow-up was not protective against developing BCRL (hazard ratio, 1.38; 95% confidence interval, 0.89-2.13; P = .152). CONCLUSIONS: Although weight loss may be recommended as part of an individualized lifestyle management program for overall health, weight loss alone may not decrease the risk of developing BCRL.

The impact of monitoring techniques on progression to chronic breast cancer-related lymphedema: a meta-analysis comparing bioimpedance spectroscopy versus circumferential measurements.

BACKGROUND: Chronic breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) is a potentially serious complication following treatment. Monitoring for progression to BCRL may allow for earlier detection and intervention, reducing the rate of progression to chronic BCRL. Therefore, the purpose of this meta-analysis is to evaluate the impact of monitoring techniques on the incidence of chronic BCRL among patients monitored by bioimpedance spectroscopy (BIS) and circumference as compared to background rates. METHODS: Eligible peer-reviewed studies from PubMed, CINHAL, or Google Scholar that were published in English from 2013 onward and conducted in North America, Europe, or Oceania. Incidence rates abstracted from studies were classified by BCRL monitoring method: background (no standardized BIS or circumference assessments), BIS or circumference. A random-effects model was used to calculate a pooled annualized estimate of BCRL incidence while accounting for clinical and methodological heterogeneity. Subgroup analyses examined differences in duration of follow-up as well as breast and axillary surgery. RESULTS: 50 studies were included, representing over 67,000 women. The annualized incidence of BCRL was 4.9% (95% CI: 4.3-5.5) for background studies (n = 35), 1.5% (95% CI: 0.6-2.4) for BIS-monitored studies (n = 7), and 7.7% (95% CI: 5.6-9.8) for circumference-monitored studies (n = 11). The cumulative BCRL incidence rate in BIS-monitored patients was 3.1% as compared to 12.9% with background monitoring (69% reduction) and 17.0% with circumference-monitored patients (81% reduction). CONCLUSIONS: Evidence suggests that monitoring with BIS allowing for early intervention significantly reduces the relative risk of chronic BCRL with a 69% and 81% reduction compared to background and circumference, respectively. Circumference monitoring did not appear to provide a benefit with respect to chronic BCRL incidence. Based on these results, BIS should be considered for BCRL screening in order to detect subclinical BCRL and reduce rates of chronic BCRL, particularly in high-risk patients.

Development and validation of a nomogram to predict the risk of breast cancer-related lymphedema among Chinese breast cancer survivors.

PURPOSE: Breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) is a major long-term complication for post-surgery breast cancer survivors. Although several risk factors have been identified, lifestyle characteristics have been neglected in previous studies. The aim of this study was to develop and validate a nomogram for estimating this population's risk of developing lymphedema, taking into consideration their demographic, clinical, and personal lifestyle behaviors. METHODS: In a cross-sectional study, we collected data from 775 post-operative breast cancer survivors who had attended a follow-up session in the recent 10 years (primary cohort). Lymphedema was assessed using the Norman telephone questionnaire, self-reported by patients. Multiple logistic regression was used to identify risk factors for lymphedema, including demographic, clinical, and lifestyle-related factors. A nomogram was constructed based on those factors and was validated using a separate group of 314 breast cancer patients (validation cohort). RESULTS: The factors independently associated with lymphedema were higher body mass index (BMI), modified radical mastectomy (MRM), postsurgical infection, chemotherapy, radiotherapy, exercise of the affected arm, and the active participation in physical activity (P<0.05). The area under the curve (AUC) values of the primary and the validation cohorts were 0.721 (95% confidence interval: 0.685-0.756) and 0.702 (95% confidence interval: 0.646-0.759), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: BCRL risk factors include MRM, radiotherapy, chemotherapy, and higher BMI, while the active physical activity behavior of patients appears to be a factor against lymphedema. The nomogram incorporating the patients' clinical and lifestyle factors might be useful for predicting lymphedema in breast cancer survivors.

Patient-reported outcomes and objective assessments with arm measurement and bioimpedance analysis for lymphedema among breast cancer survivors.

PURPOSE: Lymphedema (LE) decreases the quality of life of breast cancer patients. Objective quantification of PRO may improve the discordance between patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and objective assessments of LE by establishing a standard follow-up for LE. This study determined the prevalence of subjective and objective LE and evaluated the correlation between objective assessment and PRO of LE in primary breast cancer patients undergoing breast and axilla surgery. METHODS: Breast cancer patients who underwent sentinel lymph node biopsy (SN) or axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) more than 1 year after surgery were enrolled. We prospectively evaluated LE using the Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE) and two objective assessments (arm circumference and bioimpedance) and analyzed their correlations. RESULTS: Between November 2018 and January 2019, 631 patients (SN; n = 415, ALND; n = 216) were enrolled. The median age, body mass index, and duration from surgery was 56 years, 21.9 kg/m2, and 3.8 years, respectively. The prevalences of subjective and objective LE were 4.1% and 1.4% in the SN group and 51.8% and 24.1% in the ALND group, respectively. The objective assessments were weakly positively correlated with PRO-CTCAE. Arm circumference measurement correlated better than bioimpedance overall and was most strongly correlated with "frequency" (r = 0.485, p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: LE occurred in few SN patients. The prevalence of subjective LE was higher than that of objective LE. Arm circumference measurements better reflected PRO than did bioimpedance. These results underscore the limitation of LE detection by subjective or objective methods alone.

Patients who report cording after breast cancer surgery are at higher risk of lymphedema: Results from a large prospective screening cohort.

OBJECTIVES: To identify the association between cording and breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL); describe time course, location, symptoms and functional impairments. METHODS: A total of 1181 patients were prospectively screened for BCRL after breast cancer (BC) surgery, including patient-reported outcome measures (4193) and perometric arm volume measurements (BCRL defined as relative or weight-adjusted volume change [RVC or WAC] ≥10% ≥3 months postoperatively). RESULTS: A total of 374/1181 patients (31.7%) reported cording first a median of 4.5 months postoperatively, and were more likely to: have body mass index less than 30 kg/m2 ; be less than 55 years of age; have had mastectomy, axillary lymph node dissection, regional lymph node radiation, neoadjuvant chemotherapy (all P < .001), or RVC/WAC ≥10% (P = .002). Patients who reported cording had 2.4 times the odds of developing BCRL compared to those who did not (odds ratio = 2.40; 95% confidence interval = 1.40-4.11; P = .002), and most frequently reported these symptoms: tenderness (61.2%), aching (60.7%), and firmness/tightness (59.8%). On multivariable analysis, cording was significantly correlated with functional difficulty for 17 actions. CONCLUSIONS: Patients frequently present with cording, potentially months after BC surgery. Risk factors for and symptoms of cording are identified, and treatment is recommended. Patients reporting cording are at higher risk of BCRL, therefore, cording should be incorporated into BCRL risk stratification.

Resistance exercise and breast cancer-related lymphedema-a systematic review update and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this systematic review update and meta-analysis was to analyze resistance exercise (RE) intervention trials in breast cancer survivors (BCS) regarding their effect on breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) status and upper and lower extremity strength. METHODS: Systematic literature search was conducted utilizing PubMed, MEDLINE, and Embase databases. Any exercise intervention studies-both randomized controlled and uncontrolled-which assessed the effects of RE on BCRL in BCS in at least one intervention group published between 1966 and 31st January 2020 were included. Included articles were analyzed regarding their level of evidence and their methodological quality using respective tools for randomized and nonrandomized trials of the Cochrane collaboration. Meta-analysis for bioimpedance spectroscopy (BIS) values as well as upper and lower extremity strength was conducted. RESULTS: Altogether, 29 studies were included in the systematic review. Results of six studies with altogether twelve RE intervention groups could be pooled for meta-analysis of the BCRL. A significant reduction of BCRL after RE was seen in BIS values (95% CI - 1.10 [- 2.19, - 0.01] L-Dex score). Furthermore, strength results of six studies could be pooled and meta-analysis showed significant improvements of muscular strength in the upper and lower extremities (95% CI 8.96 [3.42, 14.51] kg and 95% CI 23.42 [11.95, 34.88] kg, respectively). CONCLUSION: RE does not have a systematic negative effect on BCRL and, on the contrary, potentially decreases it.

Impact of breast cancer-related lymphedema on working women.

BACKGROUND: The professional impact of upper limb lymphedema, which affects 15-20% of women after breast cancer treatment, has been poorly evaluated. OBJECTIVE: To analyze lymphedema characteristics and global lymphedema- and/or sleeve-attributed impact (mildly inconvenient to severely debilitating) on professional activities, workplace relationships, and workstation ergonomics. METHODS: Patients received a standardized, anonymous, self-administered questionnaire at consultation/hospitalization for treatment in a specialized lymphedema management center. RESULTS: All 134 consecutive women (March/2015-March/2017; median age 54), with 53-month median lymphedema duration and 34% median excess volume, were included; 35% considered global impact (arm-use impairment) high. For high vs. low global impact during occupational activities, univariate analyses identified global impairment as being associated with the low (23.8%), intermediate (60%), or high (63.2%) (p < 0.01) arm-use level, while multivariate analyses retained intermediate (OR 6.9 [95% CI 1.1-118.1], p < 0.01) and high (OR 4.5 [95% CI 1.5-37.3], p < 0.05) vs. low arm-use level. Lymphedema affected the careers of 70 (52.2%) patients, mostly those with severely impaired arm movement (53.8% vs. 10.2, p < 0.001), without modifying their relationships with colleagues and superiors for 84 (62.7%). Highly impaired women reported changed relationships with colleagues (45% vs. 20%, p < 0.01) and superiors (43.6% vs. 16.9%, p < 0.01). Only 10 women's (7.5%) job changes reflected lymphedema or its treatment. Workplace adaptations (53% ergonomic) were made for 36 (26.9%) patients, mostly those with greater arm-movement impairment (43.6% vs. 25.3%, p < 0.05), who were highly satisfied (86%). CONCLUSION: Upper limb lymphedema can significantly impact work, sometimes upending careers. The rare workstation adaptations were beneficial. Occupational physicians should assess lymphedema-attributed difficulties to improve working conditions.

Early surveillance is associated with less incidence and severity of breast cancer-related lymphedema compared with a traditional referral model of care.

BACKGROUND: Bioimpedance spectroscopy (BIS) has enabled the early identification of breast cancer-related lymphedema. In this study, differences in health service metrics and in the incidence of breast cancer-related lymphedema are evaluated in an early surveillance model of care compared with a traditional referral model of care. METHODS: In a retrospective analysis of data from 753 women who underwent BIS measures between January 1, 2007 and December 31, 2016, 188 women were assigned to the "early surveillance" group if they began lymphedema monitoring presurgery (n = 121) or within 90 days postsurgery (n = 67), and 285 women were assigned to the "traditional referral" group if they began monitoring after 90 days postsurgery. Health service metrics were calculated as the time to the first BIS measure after 90 days postsurgery, the median follow-up, and the number of health care visits. Lymphedema was diagnosed based on BIS measures. RESULTS: Women in the early surveillance group received lymphedema care significantly earlier than those in the traditional referral group. However, there was no difference in the number of visits per year to the clinic between groups. Significantly more women in the traditional referral group were diagnosed with clinical lymphedema (stage I-III, 39 % vs 14%; P < .001) and with greater severity (stage II-III, 24%) compared with those in the early surveillance group (4%). CONCLUSIONS: The current findings support the adoption of an early prospective surveillance model of care using BIS for the early detection and management of breast cancer-related lymphedema.

A Lymphedema Surveillance Program for Breast Cancer Patients Reveals the Promise of Surgical Prevention.

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) is one of the most significant survivorship issues in breast cancer management. Presently, there is no cure for BCRL. The single greatest risk factor for developing BCRL is an axillary lymph node dissection (ALND). Lymphatic Microsurgical Preventative Healing Approach (LYMPHA) is a surgical procedure to reduce the risk of lymphedema in patients undergoing an ALND. We present our single institution results after offering LYMPHA in the context of an established lymphedema surveillance program. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective review of our lymphedema surveillance program at the University of Florida was performed over a 2-year period (March 2014-March 2016). LYMPHA was offered to patients undergoing ALND beginning in March 2015. Patients who developed lymphedema were compared with those who did not. Demographics and potential risk factors for development of lymphedema such as age, body mass index, clinical stage, radiotherapy, and chemotherapy were reviewed. RESULTS: Eighty-seven patients participated in the surveillance program over the study period with an average age of 60 y (range 32-83) and body mass index of 30 kg/m2 (range 17-46). The single most significant risk factor for the development for lymphedema was an ALND (P < 0.001). One of 67 patients undergoing a sentinel lymph node biopsy developed lymphedema (1.5%). Four of 10 patients who underwent an ALND alone developed lymphedema (40%). One of 8 patients in the ALND + LYMPHA group developed transient lymphedema (12.5%). CONCLUSIONS: Offering LYMPHA with ALND decreased our institutional rate of lymphedema from 40% to 12.5%. Long-term follow-up and randomized control trials are necessary to further elucidate the promise of this surgical technique to reduce the incidence of BCRL.

Late Shoulder-Arm Morbidity Using Ultrasound Scalpel in Axillary Dissection for Breast Cancer: A Retrospective Analysis.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to assess whether the use of the harmonic scalpel (HS) in axillary dissection would reduce long-term shoulder-arm morbidity compared to traditional instruments (TIs). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis on 180 patients who underwent standard axillary dissection for breast cancer between 2007 and 2015 was carried out. All patients were evaluated for postoperative pain, impairment of shoulder-arm mobility, seroma formation in axilla, frozen shoulder, and lymphedema. RESULTS: HS procedure on average was 50% shorter compared to the TI technique. HS reduced by 4.5 times the risk of axillary seroma. TIs were associated with 4 times higher risk of developing a painful frozen shoulder. CONCLUSIONS: Use of the HS was associated with reduced costs and a positive long-term effect on shoulder-arm morbidity. Axillary seromas are not the only reason of later postoperative shoulder-arm morbidity: other mechanisms are hypothesized in the onset of this very disabling disorder.

Effectiveness and safety of a product containing diosmin, coumarin, and arbutin (Linfadren®) in addition to complex decongestive therapy on management of breast cancer-related lymphedema.

PURPOSE: To assess the effectiveness and safety of a product containing diosmin, coumarin, and arbutin (Linfadren®) in addition to complex decongestive therapy (CDT) on the management of patients with a breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL). METHODS: Fifty outpatients (average age of 56.2 ± 2.7 years, range 28-71) with a BCRL were enrolled for this study. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1 ratio) to receive either CDT consisting of skin care, manual lymphatic drainage, remedial exercises, and elastic compression garment (control group, n = 25) or CDT plus Linfadren® (study group, n = 25). Patients were evaluated before and after treatment and 3 months after the end of treatment. Primary outcomes were reduction of upper limb excess volume (EV) and percentage reduction of excess volume (%REV). Secondary outcomes were improvement in Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (QuickDASH) questionnaire, and patient's perception of treatment effectiveness (PPTE). RESULTS: Addition of Linfadren® to CDT yielded an additional reduction of primary outcomes both after treatment (EV, - 521 ml vs. - 256 ml, P < 0.0001; %REV, - 66.4% vs. - 34%, P = 0.02) and at 3-month follow-up (EV, - 59 ml vs. + 24 ml, P < 0.0001; %REV, - 73.6% vs. - 31.4%, P = 0.004). Moreover, statistically significant differences were found between the two groups for the secondary outcomes after treatment (QuickDASH, P = 0.006; PPTE, P = 0.03) and at 3-month follow-up (QuickDASH, P = 0.006; PPTE, P = 0.02). No patient showed adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Linfadren® in addition to CDT was a safe and effective therapy for reducing BCRL and was better than CDT alone.