Povidone-iodine sclerotherapy of primary symptomatic lymphocele after kidney transplantation

Sclerotherapy of the Post renal Transplant Lymphoceles: A Meta-Analysis

PURPOSE

This study evaluated the effectiveness of sclerotherapy in treating lymphoceles after kidney transplantation, focusing on factors such as recurrence rates and procedural success.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Retrospective studies using sclerotherapy as the only form of treatment for postrenal transplant lymphoceles were included. All studies used percutaneous transcatheter sclerotherapy as treatment, and the success rate of the intervention was recorded. Sixty-one references were obtained by manually searching the MEDLINE (n = 20), Embase (n = 41), and Cochrane Library databases (n = 0) for retrospective research studies that included the keywords "sclerotherapy post renal transplant lymphoceles." After removing 3 duplicates, 50 of the remaining articles were excluded after the screening, and the remaining studies were extracted for demographic data and our primary outcome of the success rate of sclerotherapy.

RESULTS

A descriptive analysis of the outcomes and complication rates associated with sclerotherapy interventions for lymphoceles is provided. A high degree of variation across the different studies was observed. According to the Kruskal-Wallis test, there was no correlation between the sclerosant used and the sclerotherapy complication rate (P = .472) or the success rate (P = .591). There was also no correlation between the gender of the patient and the success rate; however, there was a significant difference in the complication rate by gender (P < .005).

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, different sclerosant products have been used for therapy with no consensus on the most efficacious product because the success rate has been variable. In addition, the gender of the patient may influence the complication rates associated with sclerotherapy for lymphoceles in patients post-kidney transplant.

Back to the Future II-A Comprehensive Update on the Rapidly Evolving Field of Lymphatic Imaging and Interventions

ABSTRACT

Lymphatic imaging and interventional therapies of disorders affecting the lymphatic vascular system have evolved rapidly in recent years. Although x-ray lymphangiography had been all but replaced by the advent of cross-sectional imaging and the scientific focus shifted to lymph node imaging (eg, for detection of metastatic disease), interest in lymph vessel imaging was rekindled by the introduction of lymphatic interventional treatments in the late 1990s. Although x-ray lymphangiography is still the mainstay imaging technique to guide interventional procedures, several other, often less invasive, techniques have been developed more recently to evaluate the lymphatic vascular system and associated pathologies. Especially the introduction of magnetic resonance, and even more recently computed tomography, lymphangiography with water-soluble iodinated contrast agent has furthered our understanding of complex pathophysiological backgrounds of lymphatic diseases. This has led to an improvement of treatment approaches, especially of nontraumatic disorders caused by lymphatic flow abnormalities including plastic bronchitis, protein-losing enteropathy, and nontraumatic chylolymphatic leakages. The therapeutic armamentarium has also constantly grown and diversified in recent years with the introduction of more complex catheter-based and interstitial embolization techniques, lymph vessel stenting, lymphovenous anastomoses, as well as (targeted) medical treatment options. The aim of this article is to review the relevant spectrum of lymphatic disorders with currently available radiological imaging and interventional techniques, as well as the application of these methods in specific, individual clinical situations.

A comparison of lymphatic embolization and sclerotherapy in the management of iatrogenic abdominopelvic lymphoceles following oncological surgery

PURPOSE

To compare the safety and efficacy of sclerotherapy and lymphatic embolization (LE) in the treatment of symptomatic iatrogenic lymphoceles following the placement of a percutaneous drainage catheter.

METHODS

This is a retrospective study of 46 patients who underwent sclerotherapy (17 patients) or LE (29 patients) for the management of symptomatic iatrogenic lymphoceles following percutaneous drain placement between January 2017 and December 2021. The demographic characteristics, time between surgery and lymphatic intervention, clinical presentation, number of procedures, drain output pre- and post-intervention, time from intervention to drain removal, and adverse events were collected and compared for both groups. The clinical success rate, defined as the successful removal of the drain after one procedure, was calculated. Adverse events were reported according to the Society of Interventional Radiology classification. A statistical analysis was conducted using SPSS, and the P value for statistical significance was set at 0.05. The Mann-Whitney U test was used to compare differences in the scale variables, and Fisher's exact test was used to compare the categorical and ordinal variables between both groups.

RESULTS

A total of 46 patients with 49 lymphoceles met the inclusion criteria of the study. Of these patients, 17 patients (19 lymphoceles) underwent sclerotherapy, and 29 patients (30 lymphoceles) underwent LE as their initial procedures. The clinical success after one procedure was significantly higher (83% vs. 47%, P = 0.011), and the median time between the first intervention and drain removal was significantly shorter in the LE group (median duration of 6 vs. 13 days, P = 0.018) compared with the sclerotherapy group. No statistically significant difference in adverse events was noted between both groups (0.26 vs. 0.10, P = 0.11).

CONCLUSION

This study found that LE had a higher clinical success rate after the first procedure and a shorter time to drain removal compared with sclerotherapy. There was no difference in the rate of adverse events between both groups. Although LE is a safe and promising technique, a prospective study is needed to further compare the efficacy of both treatment modalities.

Lymphatic Interventions in the Cancer Patient

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The incidence of lymphatic leakage (iatrogenic and non-iatrogenic) is growing in cancer population due to the increased complexity of the surgical procedures and improved overall survival in cancer patients. The purpose of this article is to review the contemporary approach in the field of percutaneous lymphatic embolization in cancer patients with lymphatic leaks.

RECENT FINDINGS

Since the advent of intranodal lymphangiography in 2011 alongside with the MR and CT lymphangiography, the accuracy of diagnosis of the lymphatic diseases has significantly improved significantly. These advancements have triggered a revival of minimally invasive lymphatic interventions. Lymphatic embolization is expanding from the classic indication, thoracic duct embolization, to other lymphatic disorders (chylous ascites, lymphoceles, liver lymphorrhea, protein-losing enteropathy). The growth of lymphatic research and the standardization of the lymphatic interventions require a multidisciplinary and collaborative approach between physicians and researchers.

Diagnosis and Treatment of Lymphatic Complications of the Groin Following Open Lower Extremity Revascularization with Plastic Surgery Closure

INTRODUCTION

Lymphatic complications following vascular procedures involving the groin require prompt treatment to limit morbidity. Several treatments have been described, including conservative management, aspiration, sclerotherapy, and direct lymphatic ligation with or without a muscle flap have been described. To date, there is no data indicating which treatment results in the shortest time to recovery. We sought to address this gap by conducting a retrospective cohort study.

METHODS

We reviewed all patients who developed a lymphatic complication after undergoing an open revascularization procedure in the groin between 2014 and 2020 in which plastic surgery was involved in the closure. A control group consisted of patients from the same timespan who did not develop a lymphatic complication. Demographics, comorbidities, operative details, and outcomes were compared between these groups. For cases identified with a lymphatic complication, the method of diagnosis, culture data, and treatment details were collected, and outcomes were compared for surgical management versus sclerotherapy.

RESULTS

There were 27 lymphatic complications and 60 control patients. The complication group had a higher incidence of aortofemoral bypass (25.8% vs. 8.3%, p=0.04), and a lower incidence of femoral-to-distal bypass (11.1% vs. 45.0%, p<0.01). Daily drain output volume from postoperative days 1-5, and days 6-10, was significantly higher in the complication group than in the controls (194.0 vs. 44.0, p<0.01; and 429.5 vs. 35.0, p<0.01, respectively). In the lymphatic leak group, 16 patients (59.3%) had surgical treatment and six (22.2%) had sclerotherapy. Of those who had surgery, 71.4% had successful outcomes without the need for an additional intervention, whereas all of the patients analyzed who were treated with sclerotherapy had successful outcomes without further intervention. The average time to resolution was significantly shorter for surgery than for sclerotherapy (38.7 vs. 86.0 days, p=0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

Daily postoperative drain volume can assist with early diagnosis of a lymphatic leak in the groin following an open revascularization procedure. Sclerotherapy and surgery were each successful, but surgery resulted in significantly shorter times to resolution. In the appropriate candidates, surgery should be considered first line management of a lymphatic leak.