Postoperative swelling after elbow surgery: influence of a negative pressure application in comparison to manual lymphatic drainage-a randomized controlled trial.

PURPOSE: Postoperative soft tissue swelling is a significant factor influencing outcomes after elbow surgery. It can crucially affect important parameters such as postoperative mobilization, pain, and subsequently the range of motion (ROM) of the affected limb. Furthermore, lymphedema is considered a significant risk factor for numerous postoperative complications. Manual lymphatic drainage is nowadays part of the standardized post-treatment concept, basing on the concept of activating the lymphatic tissue to absorb stagnated fluid from the tissue into the lymphatic system. This prospective study aims to investigate the influence of technical device-assisted negative pressure therapy (NP) on early functional outcomes after elbow surgery. NP was therefore compared to manual lymphatic drainage (MLD). Is a technical device-based NP suitable for treatment of lymphedema after elbow surgery? METHODS: A total of 50 consecutive patients undergoing elbow surgery were enrolled. The patients were randomized into 2 groups. 25 participants per group were either treated by conventional MLD or NP. The primary outcome parameter was defined as the circumference of the affected limb in cm postoperative up to seven days postoperatively. The secondary outcome parameter was a subjective perception of pain (measured via visual analogue scale, VAS). All parameters were measured on each day of postoperative inpatient care. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: NP showed an overall equivalent influence compared to MLD in reducing upper limb swelling after surgery. Moreover, the application of NP showed a significant decrease in overall pain perception compared to manual lymphatic drainage on days 2, 4 and 5 after surgery (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Our findings show that NP could be a useful supplementary device in clinical routine treating postoperative swelling after elbow surgery. Its application is easy, effective and comfortable for the patient. Especially due to the shortage of healthcare workers and physical therapists, there is a need for supportive measures which NP could be.

Lymphoscintigraphy as a Therapeutic Guidance Tool Can Improve Manual Lymphatic Drainage for the Physical Treatment of Patients with Upper Limb Lymphedema: Randomized Clinical Trial.

Background: The purpose of this study was to measure the effects of lymphoscintigraphically guided manual lymphatic drainage (LG-MLD) and to compare it with standardized manual lymphatic drainage (St-MLD). Materials and Methods: Fifty-two patients with lymphedema of the upper limb who underwent lymphoscintigraphy were randomly allocated into two groups. Following the phase of physical activity, the control group underwent two phases of St-MLD as the experimental group underwent a first phase of St-MLD followed by a second phase of LG-MLD. Areas of interest were then selected [in particular, dermal backflow (DBF) and axillary lymph nodes (LN)], radioactive activities were quantified for each of these areas. Results: If a first phase of St-MLD increased the LN activity by 28% on average, the findings indicated that for the second phase of DLM, LG-MLD was 19% more efficient than St-MLD in increasing LN activity. If a period of rest does not influence the lymph charge of DBF areas, physical activity leads to an average activity increase of 17%, whereas LG-MLD and St-MLD lead to an activity decrease of 11%. Conclusions: For patients with lymphedema, the findings indicate that MLD can increase the lymphatic flow toward the lymphatic nodes by 28% on average and can decrease the charge in the areas of DBF by 11% on average. Moreover, lymphoscintigraphy can be an important therapeutic tool because LG-MLD significantly increases lymphatic flow by 19% more than St-MLD. Concerning the areas of DBF, the LG-MLD and St-MLD decrease the charge in these areas with the same intensity.

Guidelines Relevant to Diagnosis, Assessment, and Management of Lymphedema: A Systematic Review.

Significance: Lymphedema is a common, distressing and debilitating condition with various etiologies. Effective diagnosis, assessment, and management rely on evidence-based clinical practice guidelines ("guidelines"). This study aims to describe and compare international guidelines on lymphedema diagnosis, assessment, and management. Recent Advances: The review was conducted according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, and registered on the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO). Systematic searches of electronic literature databases and the web were completed in December 2020 for lymphedema guidelines published in English since 2000. Quality was assessed using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE)-II reporting checklist. Synthesis took a narrative approach to compare guideline recommendations and associated levels of evidence. Critical Issues: This systematic review of 1,564 articles and 159 web pages yielded 14 guidelines. All guidelines were from high-income countries. Ten focused exclusively on lymphedema, and four on cancer. Most (n = 13) guidelines recommended an integrated medical, psychological assessment, and physical examination, with a limb volume measurement of >10% in the affected limb compared, confirming a lymphedema diagnosis. Recommended management involved Complex Decongestive Therapy (CDT) followed by self-management using skincare, self-lymphatic drainage massage, exercise, and compression. Future Directions: The underlying etiology of lymphedema appeared to make little difference to guideline recommendations regarding care. High-quality guidelines are available to guide lymphedema care. However, their suitability for low-resource settings is unclear.

Acute Effects of Manual Lymphatic Drainage and Compression with Exercise Therapy on Breast Lymphedema Following Breast-Conserving Surgery and Radiotherapy.

Background: Breast lymphedema is a common complication of breast cancer treatments but there are limited studies about the treatment of breast lymphedema. The aim of this study was to investigate the acute effects of manual lymphatic drainage (MLD), compression with exercise on the local tissue water percentage, pain, and stiffness following breast-conserving surgery and radiotherapy. Materials and Methods: Twenty-two patients (52.54 ± 12.18 years, 28.55 ± 5.11 kg/m2) were included. The sociodemographic and clinical information was recorded. The pain and stiffness severity were measured with Visual Analog Scale. Measurements of water percentages in local tissue were performed in all quadrants of the breast with the Moisture Meter D Compact device. All measurements were performed baseline, after MLD, and after compression with exercise. Results: There was a significant difference in local tissue water percentages between the affected and unaffected sides before treatment. The percentage of water only in the lower outer quadrant of the affected breast increased significantly after acute treatment (p: 0.002). In addition, pain (p: 0.001) and stiffness (p: 0.001) scores decreased. Conclusions: Local tissue water percentages increased with MLD and decreased with compression with exercise. In the treatment of breast lymphedema, MLD and compression bandage with exercise may be beneficial in the management of the symptoms of swelling, pain, and stiffness.

Manual Lymphatic Drainage for Breast Cancer-related Lymphedema: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this systematic review was to meta-analyze the effectiveness of manual lymphatic drainage (MLD) in breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) patients. METHODS: The following databases: the Cochrane Library, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov were systematically searched. All English publications before April 2021 have been retrieved without any restrictions of countries, time, or article type. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) examining the effectiveness of MLD versus control group without MLD of women with BCRL. The outcomes were (1) the incidence of lymphedema, (2) volumetric changes of lymphedema, (3) pain, (4) quality of life. Review Manager 5.3 was used to perform statistical analysis. RESULTS: In total, 11 RCTs involving 1564 patients were included, in which 10 trials were deemed viable for inclusion in the meta-analysis. Due to the effects of MLD for BCRL, statistically significant improvements were found on the incidence of lymphedema (RR = 0.58, 95% CI [0.37, 0.93], P =.02) and pain intensity (SMD = -0.72, 95% CI [-1.34, -0.09], P = .02). Besides, the meta-analysis carried out implied that the effects that MLD had on volumetric changes of lymphedema and quality of life, were not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: The current evidence based on the RCTs shows that pain of BCRL patients undergoing MLD is significantly improved, while our findings do not support the use of MLD in improving volumetric of lymphedema and quality of life. Note that the effect of MLD for preventing BCRL is worthy of discussion.

Acute Cardiovascular Responses to the Application of Manual Lymphatic Drainage in Different Body Regions.

Background: The purpose of this study was to investigate acute cardiovascular responses to manual lymphatic drainage (MLD) on different parts of the body. Materials and Methods: Thirty healthy individuals (10 women and 20 men) participated in the study voluntarily. Heart rate (HR), systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), respiration frequency, and oxygen saturation were measured before and after MLD was applied to different regions of the body (neck, abdomen, anastomosis, arm, and leg). HR, SBP, and DBP were measured with a sphygmomanometer (OMRON, USA) and oxygen saturation was measured with a pulse oximeter. Results: Increase in DBP was seen after abdominal drainage (p = 0.038); reduction in SBP (p = 0.002) and DBP (p = 0.004) after neck drainage; reduction in SBP (p < 0.001) and HR (p = 0.004) after arm drainage; and reduction in SBP and DBP after leg drainage. There was no change in the oxygen saturation levels of participants after MLD (p > 0.05). Conclusions: In healthy subjects, the effects of MLD were found to vary according to the region of application. This study signals that the cardiovascular effects of MLD treatment vary in different regions of the body.

Long term effects of manual lymphatic drainage and active exercises on physical morbidities, lymphoscintigraphy parameters and lymphedema formation in patients operated due to breast cancer: A clinical trial.

PURPOSE: evaluate whether manual lymphatic drainage (MLD) or active exercise (AE) is associated with shoulder range of motion (ROM), wound complication and changes in the lymphatic parameters after breast cancer (BC) surgery and whether these parameters have an association with lymphedema formation in the long run. METHODS: Clinical trial with 106 women undergoing radical BC surgery, in the Women's Integrated Healthcare Center-University of Campinas. Women were matched for staging, age and body mass index and were allocated to performed AE or MLD, 2 weekly sessions during one month after surgery. The wound was evaluated 2 months after surgery. ROM, upper limb circumference measurement and upper limb lymphoscintigraphy were performed before surgery, and 2 and 30 months after surgery. RESULTS: The incidence of seroma, dehiscence and infection did not differ between groups. Both groups showed ROM deficit of flexion and abduction in the second month postoperative and partial recovery after 30 months. Cumulative incidence of lymphedema was 23.8% and did not differ between groups (p = 0.29). Concerning the lymphoscintigraphy parameters, there was a significant convergent trend between baseline degree uptake (p = 0.003) and velocity visualization of axillary lymph nodes (p = 0.001) with lymphedema formation. A reduced marker uptake before or after surgery predicted lymphedema formation in the long run (>2 years). None of the lymphoscintigraphy parameters were shown to be associated with the study group. Age ≤39 years was the factor with the greatest association with lymphedema (p = 0.009). In women with age ≤39 years, BMI >24Kg/m2 was significantly associated with lymphedema (p = 0.017). In women over 39 years old, women treated with MLD were at a significantly higher risk of developing lymphedema (p = 0.011). CONCLUSION: Lymphatic abnormalities precede lymphedema formation in BC patients. In younger women, obesity seems to be the major player in lymphedema development and, in older women, improving muscle strength through AE can prevent lymphedema. In essence, MLD is as safe and effective as AE in rehabilitation after breast cancer surgery.