The Clinical Usefulness of Lymphedema Measurement Technique Using Ultrasound

Analysis of Different Lymphedema Assessment Tools in Women with Breast Cancer After Mastectomy

Background: Lymphedema is a common complication after mastectomy in women with breast cancer. Several methods have been described to assess and diagnose lymphedema, one of the most studied being the perimeter and ultrasonography. However, the reliability of these methods and the correlation between them are still controversial. The aim of this study was to analyze the reliability of cytometry and ultrasound imaging in the assessment of lymphedema after mastectomy in women with breast cancer and to study the correlation between them. Methods and Results: A cross-sectional study was conducted in 29 women with mastectomy after breast cancer. Lymphedema in the arm was measured both with cytometry and ultrasonography. Reliability was calculated with intraclass correlation coefficient. The correlation between the two methods was carried out with the Pearson correlation coefficient. Both cytometry (M1: α = 0.999, ICC = 0.996; M2: = α = 0.998, ICC = 0.994) and ultrasonography (M1: α = 0.992, ICC = 0.976; M2: = α = 0.991, ICC = 0.973) are reliable methods to assess lymphedema in the arm. No significant correlation was found between them (p > 0.05). Conclusions: Cytometry and ultrasonography appear to be adequate for the measurement of edema in women with breast cancer after mastectomy. However, for an accurate measurement of lymphedema, these measurements should not be used interchangeably.

Optimal Cut-Off Value for Detecting Breast Cancer-Related Lymphedema Using Ultrasonography

Background: We previously devised an ultrasonographic evaluation to calculate subcutaneous tissue cross-sectional area (△CSA). The reliability and accuracy of this method were demonstrated in healthy individuals and in patients with lymphedema. The purpose of this study was to estimate the optimal cut-off value of the ratio of the △CSA of the involved side (lesion side) to the contralateral side for detecting breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) using ultrasonography. Methods and Results: Ultrasonographic measurements were performed 290 times in 150 patients. BCRLD was defined as a confirmed difference of >2 cm in arm circumference. BCRL confirmed by a clinician (BCRLC) was defined as the patient group that included not only BCRLD but also patients with subcutaneous thickening and abnormal findings on lymphoscintigraphy, even if the difference in arm circumference was <2 cm. The △CSAs of both upper arms and forearms were calculated by measuring the thickness of the subcutaneous tissue at four locations using ultrasonography (superior, medial, inferior, lateral) at 10 cm above the elbow and 10 cm below the elbow. With a 1.35 △CSA ratio as the cut-off value for detecting BCRLD, the sensitivity, specificity, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) were 0.88, 0.87, and 0.95, respectively. With a 1.20 △CSA ratio as the cut-off value for detecting BCRLC, the sensitivity, specificity, and AUC were 0.92, 0.89, and 0.97, respectively. Conclusions: Our findings suggest that a 1.20 △CSA ratio as determined using ultrasonography, corresponding to a tape measurement of 1.05 cm, can be considered as a diagnostic criterion for lymphedema.

Is the Absence of Manual Lymphatic Drainage-Based Treatment in Lymphedema after Breast Cancer Harmful? A Randomized Crossover Study

(1) Background: Manual lymphatic drainage (MLD), included within the complex decongestive therapy, as a therapy for the treatment of lymphedema has raised controversy about its benefits for lymphedema after breast cancer. The aim of this research is to test the effects of MLD on lymphedema after breast cancer during the treatment maintenance phase. (2) Methods: A randomized, single-blinded, controlled crossover trial was conducted to analyze the effects of a manual lymphatic drainage intervention compared to a control group without MLD intervention for the treatment of lymphedema. Arm volume measured by circumference measurement, subcutaneous tissue thickness measured by ultrasound, and the sensation of pain, heaviness, and swelling were evaluated as outcome measures. (3) Results: For the control group, an increase in volume was found in some of the circumference and subcutaneous tissue thickness measurements, in addition to a worsening of arm pain, swelling and heaviness. (4) Conclusion: The absence of treatment based on MLD in lymphedema after breast cancer worsens volume measurements, as well as arm heaviness. Therefore, it would be advisable to carry out this type of therapy as part of the maintenance treatment for lymphedema in breast cancer.

Ultrasonography as an instrument to evaluate lymphedema secondary to breast cancer: systematic review

Lymphedema is a chronic and progressive disease characterized by fluid accumulation, causing tissue edema as a result of a compromised lymphatic system. Diagnostic ultrasound (DUS) is a method capable of assessing soft tissue characteristics that can be used reliably to diagnose lymphedema as well as for measuring tissue compliance in a clinical setting. This is a systematic review, aiming to evaluate articles that made use of DUS in management of lymphedema secondary to breast cancer. A total of 570 articles were selected, exported to the Rayyan QCRI review program, and then screened by two researchers. From this search, 25 articles were selected after the authors reached consensus and were catalogued as to their main results. Diagnostic ultrasound was identified as an advantageous method that is safe, minimally invasive, low cost, and radiation free and is useful for evaluating the efficacy of therapies used in lymphedema treatment.

From histo-anatomy to sonography in lymphedema: EURO-MUSCULUS/USPRM approach

Lymphedema is a disorder characterized by the accumulation of protein-rich lymphatic fluid in the cutaneous and subcutaneous tissue. Based on the underlying causes, it is classified into primary and secondary forms. The use of ultrasound has recently become widespread in the field of lymphedema - especially for its diagnosis and treatment planning. In this study, we briefly reviewed the anatomy and histology of the skin and subcutaneous tissue - to propose a standardized ultrasound assessment of the superficial tissues in patients with upper-/lower-limb lymphedema. We believe that identification of the sono-histological patterns of the dermo-epidermal complex and subcutaneous tissue has place to serve as a simple and reproducible strategy to evaluate their edema diseases that are often subject to an inaccurate diagnosis in daily clinical practice.

Upper limb sensory evaluations and ultrasonographic skin measurements in breast cancer-related lymphedema receiving complex decongestive physiotherapy

Purpose

The aims of this study were to investigate if/how the presence of lymphedema affects the sensation of the upper limb and to assess whether complex decongestive physiotherapy (CDP) has a favorable impact on sensory testing.

Methods

A total of 27 patients with unilateral stage 2 breast cancer–related lymphedema (BCRL) were included in the study. Bilateral circumferential measurements were taken with a tape measure at different levels. Based on these measurements, limb volumes were determined by summing segment volumes derived from the truncated cone formula. Circumferential measurements and ultrasonographic evaluations (epidermis, dermis, and subcutaneous fat thicknesses) were performed at 10 cm distal to the elbow crease. The Semmes–Weinstein monofilament (SWM), static and moving two-point discrimination, pressure pain threshold (PPT), and tactile localization tests were also applied at the same site. After an initial evaluation, all patients underwent CDP phase 1 program. All the evaluations were repeated at the end of the treatment period.

Results

Before CDP, affected sides had significantly higher values than the unaffected sides in terms of SWM (p < 0.001), static (p = 0.002) and moving (p = 0.011) two-point discrimination, PPT (p = 0.001), and tactile localization (p < 0.001) values. After CDP, SWM (p = 0.002), static (p = 0.009) and moving (p = 0.024) two-point discrimination, PPT (p = 0.014), and tactile localization (p < 0.001) values decreased significantly on the affected sides.

Conclusion

BCRL seems to reduce light touch, static and moving two-point discrimination, PPT, and tactile localization sensations, whereas CDP seems to improve these sensory perceptions in women with BCRL. Ultrasonographic measurements also appear to be promising for prompt and convenient follow-up in the management of BCRL.

Trial registration

Clinical Trial Registration Number: NCT04296929 (date of registration: March 5, 2020)