Immediate Lymphatic Reconstruction during Axillary Node Dissection for Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Lymphedema Rates Following Axillary Lymph Node Dissection With and Without Immediate Lymphatic Reconstruction: A Prospective Trial

BACKGROUND

Immediate lymphatic reconstruction (ILR) has been proposed to decrease lymphedema rates. The primary aim of our study was to determine whether ILR decreased the incidence of lymphedema in patients undergoing axillary lymph node dissection (ALND).

METHODS

We conducted a two-site pragmatic study of ALND with or without ILR, employing surgeon-level cohort assignment, based on breast surgeons' preferred standard practice. Lymphedema was assessed by limb volume measurements, patient self-reporting, provider documentation, and International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision (ICD-10) codes.

RESULTS

Overall, 230 patients with breast cancer were enrolled; on an intention-to-treat basis, 99 underwent ALND and 131 underwent ALND with ILR. Of the 131 patients preoperatively planned for ILR, 115 (87.8%) underwent ILR; 72 (62.6%) were performed by one breast surgical oncologist and 43 (37.4%) by fellowship-trained microvascular plastic surgeons. ILR was associated with an increased risk of lymphedema when defined as ≥10% limb volume change on univariable analysis, but not on multivariable analysis, after propensity score adjustment. We did not find a statistically significant difference in limb volume measurements between the two cohorts when including subclinical lymphedema (≥5% inter-limb volume change), nor did we see a difference in grade between the two cohorts on an intent-to-treat or treatment received basis. For all patients, considering ascertainment strategies of patient self-reporting, provider documentation, and ICD-10 codes, as a single binary outcome measure, there was no significant difference in lymphedema rates between those undergoing ILR or not.

CONCLUSION

We found no significant difference in lymphedema rates between patients undergoing ALND with or without ILR.

Distally Based Lymphatic Microsurgical Preventive Healing Approach-A Modification of the Classic Approach

The treatment of breast cancer has seen great success in the recent decade. With longer survivorship, more attention is paid to function and aesthetics as integral treatment components. However, breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) remains a significant complication. Immediate lymphatic reconstruction is an emerging technique to reduce the risk of BCRL, the Lymphatic Microsurgical Preventive Healing Approach (LYMPHA) being the most widely used approach. Despite promising results, it is often difficult to find suitably sized recipient venules and perform the microanastomoses between mismatched vessels deep in the axilla. Moreover, high axillary venous pressure gradients and potential damage from radiotherapy may affect the long-term patency of the anastomoses. From an ergonomic point of view, performing lymphaticovenular anastomosis in the deep axilla may be challenging for the microsurgeon. In response to these limitations, we modified the technique by moving the lymphatic reconstruction distally-terming it distally based LYMPHA (dLYMPHA). A total of 113 patients underwent mastectomy with axillary clearance in our institution from 2018 to 2021. Of these, 26 underwent subsequent dLYMPHA (Group 2), whereas 87 did not (Group 1). In total, 17.2% (15 patients) and 3.84% (1 patient) developed BCRL in Groups 1 and 2, respectively ( p  = 0.018). Lymphatics and recipient venules suitable for anastomoses can be reliably found in the distal upper limb with better size match. A distal modification achieves a more favorable lymphaticovenular pressure gradient, vessel match, and ergonomics while ensuring a comparably low BCRL rate.

Review of treatment strategies after lymphadenectomy: From molecular therapeutics to immediate microsurgical lymphatic reconstruction

OBJECTIVE

Lymphedema is a common complication of cancer treatment, such as lymphadenectomy and radiation therapy. It is a debilitating condition with pathologic tissue changes that hinder effective curative treatment and jeopardize patients' quality of life. Various attempts to prevent the development of lymphedema have been made, with improvements in the incidence of the pathology. However, it is still prevalent among survivors of cancer. In this paper, we review both molecular therapeutics and immediate surgical lymphatic reconstruction as treatment strategies after lymphadenectomy. Specifically, we discuss pro-lymphangiogenic molecules that have proved efficient in animal models of lymphedema and clinical trials, and review currently available microsurgical techniques of immediate lymphatic reconstruction.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar through May 2022. Searches were done separately for molecular therapeutics and microsurgical techniques for immediate lymphatic reconstruction. Search terms used for (1) non-surgical methods include 'lymphangiogenesis,' 'lymphedema,' 'growth factor,' and 'gene therapy.' Search terms used for (2) surgical methods include 'lymphedema,' 'lymph node excision,' 'lymphatic vessels,' 'primary prevention,' and 'microsurgery.'

RESULTS

Various pro-lymphangiogenic factors with therapeutic potential include VEGF-C, VEGF-D, HGF, bFGF, PDGF, IGF, Retinoic acid, Ang-1, S1P, TLR4, and IL-8. Microsurgical lymphatic reconstruction for prevention of secondary lymphedema includes lymphovenous anastomosis, vascularized lymph node flap transfer, and lymph-interpositional flap transfer, with promising clinical outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

With growing knowledge of the lymphangiogenic pathway and lymphedema pathology and advances in microsurgical techniques to restore lymphatic channels, molecular and surgical approaches may represent a promising method for primary prevention of lymphedema.

Optimizing Surgical Outcomes and the Role of Preventive Surgery: A Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

 Plastic and reconstructive surgeons are often presented with reconstructive challenges as a sequela of complications in high-risk surgical patients, ranging from exposure of hardware, lymphedema, and chronic pain after amputation. These complications can result in significant morbidity, recovery time, resource utilization, and cost. Given the prevalence of surgical complications managed by plastic and reconstructive surgeons, developing novel preventative techniques to mitigate surgical risk is paramount.

METHODS

 Herein, we aim to understand efforts supporting the nascent field of Preventive Surgery, including (1) enhanced risk stratification, (2) advancements in postoperative care. Through an emphasis on four surgical cohorts who may benefit from preventive surgery, two of which are at high risk of morbidity from wound-related complications (patients undergoing sternotomy and spine procedures) and two at high risk of other morbidities, including lymphedema and neuropathic pain, we aim to provide a comprehensive and improved understanding of preventive surgery. Additionally, the role of risk analysis for these procedures and the relationship between microsurgery and prophylaxis is emphasized.

RESULTS

 (1) medical optimization and prehabilitation, (2) surgical mitigation techniques.

CONCLUSION

 Reconstructive surgeons are ideally placed to lead efforts in the creation and validation of accurate risk assessment tools and to support algorithmic approaches to surgical risk mitigation. Through a paradigm shift, including universal promotion of the concept of "Preventive Surgery," major improvements in surgical outcomes may be achieved.

Evaluating Operative Times for Intraoperative Conversion of Axillary Node Biopsy to Axillary Lymph Node Dissection with Immediate Lymphatic Reconstruction

BACKGROUND

 Lymphedema can occur in patients undergoing axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) and radiation for breast cancer. Immediate lymphatic reconstruction (ILR) is performed to decrease the risk of lymphedema in patients after ALND. Some patients who ultimately require ALND are candidates for attempted sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) or targeted axillary excision. In those scenarios, ALND can be performed (1) immediately if frozen sections are positive or (2) as a second operation following permanent pathology. The purpose of this study is to evaluate immediate ALND/ILR following positive intraoperative frozen sections to guide surgical decision-making and operative planning.

METHODS

 A single-center retrospective review was performed (2019-2022) for breast cancer patients undergoing axillary node surgery with breast reconstruction. Patients were divided into two groups: immediate conversion to ALND/ILR (Group 1) and no immediate conversion to ALND (Group 2). Demographic data and operative time were recorded.

RESULTS

 There were 148 patients who underwent mastectomy, tissue expander (TE) reconstruction, and axillary node surgery. Group 1 included 30 patients who had mastectomy, sentinel node/targeted node biopsy, TE reconstruction, and intraoperative conversion to immediate ALND/ILR. Group 2 had 118 patients who underwent mastectomy with TE reconstruction and SLNB with no ALND or ILR. Operative time for bilateral surgery was 303.1 ± 63.2 minutes in Group 1 compared with 222.6 ± 52.2 minutes in Group 2 (p = 0.001). Operative time in Group 1 patients undergoing unilateral surgery was 252.3 ± 71.6 minutes compared with 171.3 ± 43.2 minutes in Group 2 (p = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

 Intraoperative frozen section of sentinel/targeted nodes extended operative time by approximately 80 minutes in patients undergoing mastectomy with breast reconstruction and conversion of SLNB to ALND/ILR. Intraoperative conversion to ALND adds unpredictability to the operation as well as additional potentially unaccounted operative time. However, staging ALND requires an additional operation.

Lymphovenous Coupler-Assisted Bypass for Immediate Lymphatic Reconstruction

BACKGROUND

 Breast cancer-related lymphedema is the most common cause of lymphedema in the United States and occurs in up to 50% of individuals receiving axillary lymph node dissection (ALND). Lymphovenous bypass (LVB) at the time of ALND may prevent lymphedema, but long-term results and anastomotic patency are unclear. This study evaluates the feasibility and outcomes of performing immediate lymphatic reconstruction via coupler-assisted bypass (CAB).

METHODS

 This is a retrospective review of all patients undergoing prophylactic LVB following ALND at two tertiary care centers between 2018 and 2022. Patients were divided into cohorts based on whether they received the "standard" end-to-end (E-E) suturing or CAB technique. The primary outcome of interest was development of lymphedema. Quantitative and qualitative assessments for lymphedema were performed preoperatively and at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months postoperatively.

RESULTS

 Overall, 63 LVBs were performed, of which 24 lymphatics underwent immediate reconstruction via "CAB" and 39 lymphatics via "standard" end-to-end suture. Patient characteristics, including body mass index, and treatment characteristics, including radiation therapy, did not significantly differ between groups. CAB was associated with a greater mean number of lymphatics bypassed per vein (standard 1.7 vs. CAB 2.6, p = 0.0001) and bypass to larger veins (standard 1.2 vs. CAB 2.2 mm, p < 0.0001). At a median follow-up of 14.7 months, 9.1% (1/11) of individuals receiving CAB developed lymphedema. These rates were similar to those seen following standard bypass at 4.8% (1/21), although within a significantly shorter follow-up duration (standard 7.8 vs. CAB 14.7 months, p = 0.0170).

CONCLUSION

 The CAB technique is a viable, effective technical alternative to the standard LVB technique. This comparative study of techniques in prophylactic LVB suggests that CABs maintain long-term patency, possibly due to the ease of anastomosing several lymphatics to single large caliber veins while reducing the technical demands of the procedure.

Personalizing Locoregional Therapy in Patients With Breast Cancer in 2024: Tailoring Axillary Surgery, Escalating Lymphatic Surgery, and Implementing Evidence-Based Hypofractionated Radiotherapy

The management of axillary lymph nodes in breast cancer is continually evolving. Recent data now support omitting axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) in most patients with metastases in up to two sentinel lymph nodes (SLNs) during upfront surgery and those with residual isolated tumor cells after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT). In the upfront surgery setting, ALND is still indicated, however, in patients with clinically node-positive breast cancer or more than two positive SLNs and, after NACT, in case of residual micrometastases and macrometastases. Omission of the sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) can be considered in many postmenopausal patients with small luminal breast cancer, particularly when axillary ultrasound is negative. Several randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are currently aiming at eliminating the remaining indications for ALND and also establishing omission of SLNB in a broader patient population. The movement to deescalate axillary staging is in part because of the association between ALND and lymphedema, which is swelling of an extremity because of lymphatic damage and obstructed lymphatic drainage. To reduce the risk of developing this condition, patients undergoing ALND can undergo reverse mapping of the axilla and immediate reconstruction or bypass of the lymphatics from the involved extremity. Decongestion and compression are the foundation of conservative treatment for established lymphedema, while lymphovenous bypass and lymph node transfer are surgical procedures to address the physiologic dysfunction. Radiotherapy is an essential component of breast locoregional therapy: more than three decades of radiation research has optimized treatment according to patient's risk of local recurrence while substantially reducing the number of treatment visits. High-quality RCTs have shown the efficacy and safety of hypofractionation-more than 2Gy radiation dose per treatment (fraction)-significantly reducing the burden of radiotherapy treatment for many patients with breast cancer. In 2024, guidelines recommend no more than 15-16 fractions for whole-breast and nodal radiotherapy, with some recommending five fractions for whole-breast radiotherapy. In addition, simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) has been shown to be noninferior to sequential boost with regards to ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence with similar or reduced long-term side effects, also reducing overall treatment length. Further RCTs are underway investigating other indications for five fractions, including SIB and regional node irradiation, such that, in future, it may be possible for the majority of breast radiotherapy patients to be treated with a 1-week course. This manuscript serves to outline the latest updates on axillary surgical staging, lymphatic surgery, and evidence-based radiotherapy in the treatment of breast cancer.

The Impact of Obesity on Success of Immediate Lymphatic Reconstruction for Prevention of Breast Cancer-Related Lymphedema

BACKGROUND

Breast cancer-related lymphedema (BRCL) is a potential sequela of high-risk breast cancer treatment. Preventive treatment with immediate lymphatic reconstruction (ILR) at the time of axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) has emerged as the standard of care; however, there is relatively little known about factors that may contribute to procedural failure.

METHODS

A retrospectively maintained, institutional review board-approved study followed patients who underwent ILR at the time of ALND at our tertiary care center between May 2018 and May 2023. Patients who presented for at least one follow-up visit in our multidisciplinary lymphedema clinic met the criteria for inclusion. Patients who developed lymphedema despite ILR and potential contributing factors were further explored.

RESULTS

349 patients underwent ILR at our institution between May 2018 and May 2023. 341 of these patients have presented for follow-up in our multidisciplinary lymphedema clinic. 32 (9.4%) patients developed lymphedema despite ILR. This cohort was significantly more likely to be obese (56% vs 35%, P = 0.04). Multivariate logistic regression demonstrates increased odds of procedural failure in patients with a body mass index (BMI) ≥30 kg/m2 (odds ratio 2.6 [1.2-5.5], P = 0.01).

CONCLUSION

These data comment upon our institutions outcomes following ILR. Patients who develop lymphedema despite ILR tend to have a higher BMI, with a significantly increased risk in patients with a BMI of 30 or greater. Consideration of these data is critical for preprocedural counseling and may support a BMI cutoff when considering candidacy for ILR going forward, as well as when optimizing failures for secondary lymphedema procedures.

Biomaterials in the clinical treatment of lymphedema-a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

Lymphedema is a chronic condition caused by impaired lymphatic fluid drainage, resulting in progressive edema. The current mainstay of lymphedema therapy consists of conservative therapy and surgical therapy. In this systematic review, we investigated the novel role of biomaterials in clinical lymphedema therapy and assessed their objective outcomes and the complication rate associated with their use.

METHODS

Studies were identified through systematic review using the Embase and PubMed/MEDLINE databases. Only original articles reporting the use of biomaterials for clinical lymphedema therapy were included. The primary outcome measure was the objective reduction in limb volume after biomaterial use. The secondary outcome measure was the assessment of biomaterial safety.

RESULTS

A total of 354 articles were identified in the first search, of which 10 met our inclusion criteria. These articles described the use of two biomaterials, nanofibrillar collagen scaffolds (NCSs) and silicone tubes (STs), for the treatment of lymphedema. NCS implantation showed an average excess limb volume reduction of 1% to 10.7% and clear evidence of lymphangiogenesis on imaging. No complications were 7documented after NCS implantation. ST implantation showed an average limb volume reduction of 700 to 887 mL and limb circumference reduction of 3.1 to 8 cm in patients with advanced stage lymphedema. Of 177 patients treated with ST implantation, only 11 (6.2%) developed local inflammation.

CONCLUSIONS

Both NCS and ST implantation showed promising limb volume reduction; however, with the scarce literature available, additional research is needed to determine their effectiveness. Both demonstrated good safety profiles, with no complications after NCS implantation and a complication rate equivalent to other similar implants for ST implantation.

Is Immediate Lymphatic Reconstruction on Breast Cancer Patients Oncologically Safe? A Preliminary Study

Background

In breast cancer patients receiving axillary lymph node dissection (ALND), immediate lymphatic reconstruction (ILR) with lymphovenous anastomosis is an emerging technique for reducing the risk of arm lymphedema. However, the oncologic safety of surgically diverting lymphatic ducts directly into venules in a node-positive axilla is still a concern of inadvertently inducing metastasis of remaining cancer cells. This study aimed to assess the oncologic safety of ILR.

Methods

From January 2020 to January 2022, 95 breast cancer patients received ALND, and 45 of them also received ILR. Patients with recurrent cancer, with follow-up less than 12 months, and with missed data were excluded. Variables were compared between ILR and non-ILR groups, and the outcome of interest was the rate of distant recurrence after follow-up for at least 1 year.

Results

Thirty-four patients in the ILR group and 32 patients in the non-ILR group fulfilled the inclusion criteria for analysis. No statistically significant difference was noted between groups in terms of age, body mass index, type of breast surgery, pathologic cancer staging, histologic type and grade of breast cancer, molecular subtypes, frequency of axillary lymph node metastasis, or adjuvant therapy. For the patients receiving follow-up for at least 1 year, no statistically significant difference was found in terms of distant recurrence rates between ILR and non-ILR groups (P = 0.44).

Conclusion

For breast cancer patients receiving ALND, ILR with lymphovenous anastomosis is oncologically safe, within an average follow-up period of 21 months.

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.

Incorporating Lymphovenous Anastomosis in Clinically Node-Positive Women Receiving Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: A Shared Decision-Making Model and Nuanced Approached to the Axilla

Introduction: Lymphedema remains a risk for 13–34% of breast cancer patients who require an axillary dissection (ALND) and radiation. Immediate lymphovenous anastomosis (LVA) may mitigate lymphedema by up to 30% by restoring the physiologic lymphatic drainage immediately after ALND. Currently, completion of ALND (cALND) versus radiation after neoadjuvant therapy (NAC) is being addressed by the Alliance A11202 trial, leaving a paucity of data to guide practice. Our study describes the implementation process of LVA into clinical practice after NAC for node-positive breast cancer in the current clinical context. Methods: We reviewed a prospective database of LVA in node-positive patients (cT1-4,Nany) who received NAC followed by axillary surgery ± immediate LVA from October 2021 to 2022. The evolution of the surgical approach is described. Specifically, patients who downstaged to clinically negative nodes post-NAC were offered targeted SLNB with dual-tracer and intraoperative frozen section (FS). Patients were reminded that the standard of care for any node positive is cALND. Immediate cALND with LVA was performed for grossly positive nodes or all positive SLNs; cALND was omitted for those with negative SLNs. For a microscopic disease on a frozen section, a shared decision was made pre-operatively, given each patient’s differing valuations of the benefit and risks of cALND ± LVA versus no cALND with planned regional radiation postoperatively. LVA was offered as an option as part of our institutional evaluation of the procedure. Results: A total of 15 patients were included; the mean age was 49.9 (range 32–75) with stage IIA to IIIB breast cancer. Of these, 6 (40%) were triple negative, 5 (33.3%) HER-2 positive, and 4 (26.7%) ER/PR+ HER-2 negative. There were 13 women (86.7%) who had persistent axillary adenopathy based on clinical and/or ultrasound assessment, with 8 patients proceeding directly to ALND with LVA. Among these patients, 3 (37.5%) had pathologic nodal disease, and 5 (62.5%) were node negative, confirming the limitations of pre-operative imaging. As a result, the subsequent 7 (46.7%) underwent targeted SLNB with FS, with 3 patients (42.9%) avoiding an ALND as a result of a negative FS. A total of 4 patients (57.1%) had 1 or more positive lymph nodes on FS: 3 proceeded with a cALND and LVA, and 1 patient (14.2%) opted for no cALND based on a pre-operative discussion and received adjuvant radiation and chemotherapy. Of the 11 patients who underwent ALND and LVA, 1 patient (9.1%) developed lymphedema at 6.9 months following their surgery. The accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of pre-operative US were 46.7%, 85.7%, and 12.5% and intraoperative FS were 88.0%, 72.7%, and 100%, respectively. Conclusions: As adjuvant nodal radiation and systemic therapy continue to improve, the benefit of a cALND in patients with the limited residual disease remains unclear as we await the outcomes from clinical trials. In the era of clinical uncertainty, we propose a nuanced approach to the axilla by utilizing a shared decision model with patients, incorporating targeted SLNB with FS and completion node dissection when required and desired by the patient, coupled with LVA in a simple stepwise treatment pathway.

Algorithm-Based Risk Identification in Patients with Breast Cancer-Related Lymphedema: A Cross-Sectional Study

Background: Breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) could be one consequence of breast cancer (BC). Although several risk factors have been identified, a predictive algorithm still needs to be made available to determine the patient's risk from an ensemble of clinical variables. Therefore, this study aimed to characterize the risk of BCRL by investigating the characteristics of autogenerated clusters of patients. Methods: The dataset under analysis was a multi-centric data collection of twenty-three clinical features from patients undergoing axillary dissection for BC and presenting BCRL or not. The patients' variables were initially analyzed separately in two low-dimensional embeddings. Afterward, the two models were merged in a bi-dimensional prognostic map, with patients categorized into three clusters using a Gaussian mixture model. Results: The prognostic map represented the medical records of 294 women (mean age: 59.823±12.879 years) grouped into three clusters with a different proportion of subjects affected by BCRL (probability that a patient with BCRL belonged to Cluster A: 5.71%; Cluster B: 71.42%; Cluster C: 22.86%). The investigation evaluated intra- and inter-cluster factors and identified a subset of clinical variables meaningful in determining cluster membership and significantly associated with BCRL biological hazard. Conclusions: The results of this study provide potential insight for precise risk assessment of patients affected by BCRL, with implications in prevention strategies, for instance, focusing the resources on identifying patients at higher risk.