Developing a Lymphatic Surgery Program: A First-Year Review

Changes on Non-contrast MRI Following Lymphatic Surgery for Upper Extremity Secondary Lymphedema

OBJECTIVE

To assess changes in non-contrast MRI-based biomarkers following upper extremity lymphedema surgery.

METHODS

We retrospectively identified secondary upper extremity lymphedema patients who underwent vascularized lymph node transplant (VLNT), debulking lipectomy, or VLNT with a prior debulking (performed separately). All patients with both pre- and post-surgical MRIs were compared. An MRI-based edema scoring system was used: 0 (no edema), 1 (less than 50% fluid from myofascial to dermis), and 2 (50% or greater fluid from myofascial to dermis). Edema scores and subcutaneous thickness (ST) were obtained along four quadrants across the upper and lower third of the arm and forearm each-for a total of 16 anatomical locations-and compared before and after surgery. Net changes in edema scores and ST were then correlated with LYMPH-Q (quality of life) scores, L-Dex (bioimpedance), and limb volume difference by perometry.

RESULTS

Patients who underwent lymphatic surgeries between January 2017-December 2022 and successfully completed pre- and post-surgery MRI were included, resulting in a total of 33 unilateral secondary upper extremity lymphedema patients (age 63 ± 14 years, 32 Female). The median range post-operative follow-up times were 12.5 [6-19] months for VLNT, 13.5 [12-40] months for debulking, and 12.0 [12-24] months for patients who underwent VLNT following debulking surgery. There was a decrease in mean subcutaneous thickness (ST) in 15 of 16 anatomical segments of the upper extremity following debulking (p<.001), while edema score increased in 7 of 16 segments (p≤02). Edema stage did not change in patients who underwent VLNT-only or VLNT following debulking. ST decreased only along the radial forearm in patients who underwent VLNT following debulking despite an improvement in LYMPQOL in the former group. There was correlation between a decrease in ST with a decrease in volume within the debulking group (r=0.79, p<.001). A reduction in ST also correlated with improved LYMQOL in the debulking group (r=0.49, p=0.04).

CONCLUSION

A reduction in subcutaneous thickness was demonstrated in most anatomical segments following liposuction debulking, while edema stage was increased. Fewer changes were seen with VLNT, possibly a reflection of more gradual changes within this short follow-up period, with the radial forearm potentially revealing the earliest response.

Immediate lymphatic reconstruction: Lessons learned over eight years

Immediate lymphatic reconstruction (ILR) is recognized as a surgical approach used to reduce the risk of developing secondary lymphedema, and evidence demonstrating the efficacy of ILR is favorable. Our Lymphatic Center has become a centralized location offering ILR for the risk-reduction in breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) in New England. Over the course of our experience, we made several modifications and adapted our approach to enhance the operative success of this procedure. These include advancements in our use of indocyanine green (ICG) imaging to identify baseline lymphatic anatomical variation, utilization of fluorescein isothiocyanate for lymphatic vessel visualization, application of the lymphosome concept to guide arm injection sites, verification of anastomotic patency (using ICG), localization of reconstruction to guide radiation therapy, incorporation of intraoperative tools to facilitate better anatomic visualization of the axilla, and addition of a lower extremity vein graft to mitigate venous-related complications. Collecting information from each surgery in a standardized manner, including intraoperative lymphatic channel measurements, and deploying clips for possible future radiation exposure, enables future studies on ILR patient outcomes. In this contribution, we aimed to share our institutional modifications with the surgical community to facilitate further adoption, conversation, and advancement of ILR for the risk-reduction in BCRL.

Expanding Access to Immediate Lymphatic Reconstruction Through an Axillary Surgery Referral Program: A 6-Year Single-Center Experience

BACKGROUND

Recent advances in breast cancer have progressed toward less aggressive axillary surgery. However, axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) remains necessary in specific cases and can increase the risk of lymphedema. Performing ALND with immediate lymphatic reconstruction (ILR) can help lower this risk. This report outlines the implementation of an Axillary Surgery Referral Program (ASRP) to broaden access to ILR, providing insights for institutions considering similar initiatives.

METHODS

A retrospective study analyzed patients referred to the ASRP at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (BIDMC) between 6 January 2017 and 10 December 2022. Patients were identified from a prospective registry, with data subsequently extracted from electronic medical records. This analysis specifically centered on patients referred from external institutions to undergo ALND with ILR.

RESULTS

The program received referrals for 131 patients from institutions across five different states. Annual referrals steadily increased over time. The primary indication for referral was residual axillary disease after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (41.2%). Among the referrals, 20 patients (15.3%) no longer required ALND due to axillary pathologic complete response to neoadjuvant therapy. Care coordination played a crucial role in streamlining the patient care process for both efficiency and effectiveness.

CONCLUSION

The ASRP expands access to ILR for patients with breast cancer, the majority referred for surgical management of residual disease after chemotherapy. The program provides a model for health care institutions aiming to establish similar specialized referral services. Continued program evaluation will be instrumental in refining axillary surgery referral practices and ensuring optimal patient care.

Advances in lymphedema: An under-recognized disease with a hopeful future for patients

Lymphedema has traditionally been underappreciated by the healthcare community. Understanding of the underlying pathophysiology and treatments beyond compression have been limited until recently. Increased investigation has demonstrated the key role of inflammation and resultant fibrosis and adipose deposition leading to the clinical sequelae and associated reduction in quality of life with lymphedema. New imaging techniques including magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), indocyanine green lymphography, and high-frequency ultrasound offer improved resolution and understanding of lymphatic anatomy and flow. Nonsurgical therapy with compression, exercise, and weight loss remains the mainstay of therapy, but growing surgical options show promise. Physiologic procedures (lymphovenous anastomosis and vascularized lymph node transfers) improve lymphatic flow in the diseased limb and may reduce edema and the burden of compression. Debulking, primarily with liposuction to remove the adipose deposition that has accumulated, results in a dramatic decrease in limb girth in appropriately selected patients. Though early, there are also exciting developments of potential therapeutic targets tackling the underlying drivers of the disease. Multidisciplinary teams have developed to offer the full breadth of evaluation and current management, but the development of a greater understanding and availability of therapies is needed to ensure patients with lymphedema have greater opportunity for optimal care.

Establishment and Feasibility of an Immediate Lymphatic Reconstruction Program in a Community Health System

BACKGROUND

Breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) remains a significant post-surgical complication of breast cancer treatment. Immediate lymphatic reconstruction (ILR) at the time of axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) has shown promise in preventing BCRL. While the primary literature supporting ILR comes from academic institutions, the majority of breast cancer care in the USA occurs in the community setting. This study evaluated a preventative lymphedema program performing ILR at a community health system.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A prospective database including all patients who underwent ALND with concurrently attempted ILR from 2019 to 2021 was retrospectively reviewed. The historical benchmark lymphedema rate was calculated through retrospective review of electronic medical records for all patients who underwent ALND without ILR from 2011 to 2021.

RESULTS

Ninety patients underwent ALND with ILR, of which ILR was successful in 69 (76.7%). ILR was more likely to be aborted in smokers (p < 0.05) and those with fewer lymphatic channels (p < 0.05) or a higher body mass index (BMI) (p = 0.08). Patients with successful versus aborted ILR had lower lymphedema rates (10.9% versus 66.7%, p < 0.01) and improved Disability of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) scores (8.7 versus 19.8, p = 0.25), and lower lymphedema rates than the historical benchmark (10.9% versus 50.2%, p < 0.01). Among patients with successful ILR, older patients were more likely to develop lymphedema (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Successful ILR after ALND significantly reduced the lymphedema rate when compared with patients with aborted ILR and our institution's historical benchmark. Our experience supports the efficacy of ILR and highlights the feasibility of ILR within a community health system.

Acupuncture Treatment for Breast Cancer-Related Lymphedema: A Randomized Pilot Study

Background: Methods of conservative management for breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) are burdensome in terms of time, cost, and convenience. In addition, many patients are not candidates for surgical treatment. Preliminary results have demonstrated possible beneficial effects of acupuncture for patients with BCRL. In this small pilot study, we examined the safety and feasibility of an acupuncture randomized control trial (RCT) in this patient cohort, utilizing a battery of standardized clinical and patient-centered outcome measures. Methods and Results: Patients with BCRL were randomized 2:1 to the acupuncture (n = 10) or the control (n = 4) group. Patients received acupuncture to the unaffected extremity biweekly for 6 weeks. Feasibility was defined as enrollment ≥80%, completion of ≥9 of 12 acupuncture sessions per person, and ≥75% completion of three of three measurement visits. To inform a future adequately powered RCT, we describe within-group changes in patient-centered outcomes, including circumferential measurements, bioimpedance spectroscopy, perometry, cytokine levels, and patient quality of life. Adverse events were systematically tracked. Fourteen patients completed the study. Of those who received acupuncture (n = 10), 8 completed all 12 acupuncture sessions, and 2 patients completed 11 sessions. Ninety-three percent of all participants completed all three measurement visits. There was no consistent improvement in arm volumes. Inflammatory marker levels had inconclusive fluctuations among both groups. All patients receiving acupuncture demonstrated an improvement in their functional quality-of-life score. No severe adverse events occurred. Conclusions: A randomized controlled study of acupuncture for BCRL is feasible. The acupuncture intervention is acceptable in this population, without safety concerns in a small sample and warrants further investigation.

Tracking Symptoms of Patients With Lymphedema Before and After Power-Assisted Liposuction Surgery

PURPOSE

Lymphedema negatively impacts patients from a psychosocial standpoint and consequently affects patient's quality of life. Debulking procedures using power-assisted liposuction (PAL) are currently deemed an effective treatment for fat-dominant lymphedema and improves anthropometric measurements as well as quality of life. However, there have been no studies specifically evaluating changes in symptoms related to lymphedema after PAL. An understanding of how symptoms change after this procedure would be valuable for preoperative counseling and to guide patient expectations.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was performed in patients with extremity lymphedema who underwent PAL from January 2018 to December 2020 at a tertiary care facility. A retrospective chart review and follow-up phone survey were conducted to compare signs and symptoms related to lymphedema before and after PAL.

RESULTS

Forty-five patients were included in this study. Of these, 27 patients (60%) underwent upper extremity PAL and 18 patients (40%) underwent lower extremity PAL. The mean follow-up time was 15.5±7.9 months. After PAL, patients with upper extremity lymphedema reported having resolved heaviness (44%), as well as improved achiness (79%) and swelling (78%). In patients with lower extremity lymphedema, they reported having improved all signs and symptoms, particularly swelling (78%), tightness (72%), and achiness (71%).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with fat-dominant lymphedema, PAL positively impacts patient-reported outcomes in a sustained fashion over time. Continuous surveillance of postoperative studies is required to elucidate factors independently associated with the outcomes found in our study. Moreover, further studies using a mixed method approach will help us better understand patient's expectations to achieve informed decision and adequate treatment goals.

MRI of Lymphedema

Lymphedema is a devastating disease that has no cure. Management of lymphedema has evolved rapidly over the past two decades with the advent of surgeries that can ameliorate symptoms. MRI has played an increasingly important role in the diagnosis and evaluation of lymphedema, as it provides high spatial resolution of the distribution and severity of soft tissue edema, characterizes diseased lymphatic channels, and assesses secondary effects such as fat hypertrophy. Many different MR techniques have been developed for the evaluation of lymphedema, and the modality can be tailored to suit the needs of a lymphatic clinic. In this review article we provide an overview of lymphedema, current management options, and the current role of MRI in lymphedema diagnosis and management. EVIDENCE LEVEL: 5 TECHNICAL EFFICACY: Stage 5.

Risk Factors Associated with Adverse Outcomes after Ablative Surgery for Lymphedema

BACKGROUND

 Postmastectomy breast cancer lymphedema poses an important health threat. Historically, physical therapy was the exclusive treatment option. More recently, lymphedema surgery has revolutionized care. As a first-in-kind, multicenter report, the postmastectomy breast cancer patients' risk factors associated with postlymphedema ablative surgical outcomes were documented.

METHODS

 Using the New York Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System database from 2010 to 2018, multivariable models identified the postmastectomy breast cancer lymphedema surgical patients' characteristics associated with major adverse outcomes and mortality.

RESULTS

 Of 65,543 postmastectomy breast cancer patients, 1,052 lymphedema surgical procedures were performed including 393 (37.4%) direct excisions and 659 (63.6%) liposuctions. Direct excision and liposuction surgical patients had median ages of 58 and 52 years, respectfully (p < 0.001). Although a 30-day operative mortality was rare (0.3%, all direct excisions), major adverse outcomes occurred in 154 patients (28.5% direct excision; 6.4% liposuction; p < 0.0001). Multivariable clinical outcomes model identified that patients with higher Elixhauser's score, renal disease, emergent admissions, and direct excision surgery had higher incidences of adverse outcomes (all p < 0.01). For those patients with 30-day readmissions (n = 60), they were more likely to have undergone direct excision versus liposuction (12.5 vs. 1.7%; p < 0.0001). The important risk factors predictive of future cellulitis/lymphangitis development included diabetes mellitus, Medicaid insurance, renal disease, prior cellulitis/lymphangitis, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and chronic steroid use (all p < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

 Lymphedema surgery carries a favorable risk profile, but better understanding the "high-risk" patients is critical. As this new era of lymphedema surgery progresses, evaluating the characteristics for adverse postoperative outcomes is an important step in our evolution of knowledge.

Superficial and Functional Lymphatic Anatomy of the Upper Extremity

BACKGROUND

Knowledge of detailed lymphatic anatomy in humans is limited, as the small size of lymphatic channels makes it difficult to image. Most current knowledge of the superficial lymphatic system has been obtained from cadaveric dissections.

METHODS

Indocyanine green lymphography was performed preoperatively to map the functional arm lymphatics in breast cancer patients without clinical or objective evidence of lymphedema. A retrospective review was performed to extract demographic, indocyanine green imaging, and surgical data.

RESULTS

Three main functional forearm channels with variable connections to two upper arm pathways were identified. The median forearm channel predominantly courses in the volar forearm (99 percent). The ulnar forearm channel courses in the volar forearm in the majority of patients (66 percent). The radial forearm channel courses in the dorsal forearm in the majority of patients (92 percent). Median (100 percent), radial (91 percent), and ulnar (96 percent) channels almost universally connect to the medial upper arm channel. In contrast, connections to the lateral upper arm channel occur less frequently from the radial (40 percent) and ulnar (31 percent) channels.

CONCLUSIONS

This study details the anatomy of three forearm lymphatic channels and their connections to the upper arm in living adults without lymphatic disease. Knowledge of these pathways and variations is relevant to any individual performing procedures on the upper extremities, as injury to the superficial lymphatic system can predispose patients to the development of lymphedema.

Primary Prevention of Cancer-Related Lymphedema Using Preventive Lymphatic Surgery: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Background  Several studies have proven prophylactic lymphovenous anastomosis (LVA) performed after lymphadenectomy can potentially reduce the risk of cancer-related lymphedema (CRL) without compromising the oncological treatment. We present a systematic review of the current evidence on the primary prevention of CRL using preventive lymphatic surgery (PLS).

Patients and Methods  A comprehensive search across PubMed, Cochrane-EBMR, Web of Science, Ovid Medline (R) and in-process, SCOPUS, and ScienceDirect was performed through December 2020. A meta-analysis with a random-effect method was accomplished.

Results  Twenty-four studies including 1547 patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Overall, 830 prophylactic LVA procedures were performed after oncological treatment, of which 61 developed lymphedema.

The pooled cumulative rate of upper extremity lymphedema after axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) and PLS was 5.15% (95% CI, 2.9%–7.5%; p  < 0.01). The pooled cumulative rate of lower extremity lymphedema after oncological surgical treatment and PLS was 6.66% (95% CI < 1–13.4%, p-value = 0.5). Pooled analysis showed that PLS reduced the incidence of upper and lower limb lymphedema after lymph node dissection by 18.7 per 100 patients treated (risk difference [RD] – 18.7%, 95% CI – 29.5% to – 7.9%; p  < 0.001) and by 30.3 per 100 patients treated (RD – 30.3%, 95% CI – 46.5% to – 14%; p  < 0.001), respectively, versus no prophylactic lymphatic reconstruction.

Conclusions  Low-quality studies and a high risk of bias halt the formulating of strong recommendations in favor of PLS, despite preliminary reports theoretically indicating that the inclusion of PLS may significantly decrease the incidence of CRL.

National Outcomes of Prophylactic Lymphovenous Bypass during Axillary Lymph Node Dissection

BACKGROUND

 Breast cancer treatment, including axillary lymph node excision, radiation, and chemotherapy, can cause upper extremity lymphedema, increasing morbidity and health care costs. Institutions increasingly perform prophylactic lymphovenous bypass (LVB) at the time of axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) to reduce the risk of lymphedema but reports of complications are lacking. We examine records from the American College of Surgeons (ACS) National Surgery Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database to examine the safety of these procedures.

METHODS

 Procedures involving ALND from 2013 to 2019 were extracted from the NSQIP database. Patients who simultaneously underwent procedures with the Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes 38999 (other procedures of the lymphatic system), 35201 (repair of blood vessel), or 38308 (lymphangiotomy) formed the prophylactic LVB group. Patients in the LVB and non-LVB groups were compared for differences in demographics and 30-day postoperative complications including unplanned reoperation, deep vein thrombosis (DVT), wound dehiscence, and surgical site infection. Subgroup analysis was performed, controlling for extent of breast surgery and reconstruction. Multivariate logistic regression was performed to identify predictors of reoperation.

RESULTS

 The ALND without LVB group contained 45,057 patients, and the ALND with LVB group contained 255 (0.6%). Overall, the LVB group was associated with increased operative time (288 vs. 147 minutes, p < 0.001) and length of stay (1.7 vs. 1.3 days, p < 0.001). In patients with concurrent mastectomy without immediate reconstruction, the LVB group had a higher rate of DVTs (3.0 vs. 0.2%, p = 0.009). Reoperation, wound infection, and dehiscence rates did not differ across subgroups. Multivariate logistic regression showed that LVB was not a predictor of reoperations.

CONCLUSION

 Prophylactic LVB at time of ALND is a generally safe and well-tolerated procedure and is not associated with increased reoperations or wound complications. Although only four patients in the LVB group had DVTs, this was a significantly higher rate than in the non-LVB group and warrants further investigation.

Immediate Lymphatic Reconstruction for Prevention of Secondary Lymphedema: A Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Secondary lymphedema remains one of the most notorious complications of axillary and pelvic lymph node surgery following mastectomy. There is a lack of high-level evidence found on the effectiveness of immediate lymphatic reconstruction (ILR) in preventing secondary lymphedema. This meta-analysis evaluates the outcomes of ILR for prevention of secondary lymphedema in patients undergoing different surgeries, and provides suggestions for lymphatic microsurgical preventive healing approach (LYMPHA).

METHODS

A review of PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science was performed according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses guidelines. All English-language studies published from January 1, 2009 to June 1, 2020 were included. We excluded non-ILR interventions, literature reviews/letters/commentaries, and nonhuman or cadaver studies. A total of 789 patients that were enrolled in 13 studies were included in our one-arm meta-analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 13 studies (n=789) met inclusion criteria: upper extremity ILR (n=665) and lower extremity ILR (n=124). The overall incidence of lymphedema for upper extremity ILR was 2.7% (95%CI: 1.1%-4.4%) and lower extremity ILR was 3.6% (95%CI: 0.3%-10.1%). For upper extremity ILR, the average follow-up time was 11.6 ± 7.8 months and the LE incidence appeared to be the highest approximately 1 to 2 years postoperation.

CONCLUSIONS

Lymphedema is a common complication in cancer treatment. ILR, especially LYMPHA, may be an effective technique to facilitate lymphatic drainage at the time of the index procedure but future studies will be required to show its short-term efficacy and long-term outcomes.

Microsurgical techniques in the treatment of breast cancer-related lymphedema: a systematic review of efficacy and patient outcomes

INTRODUCTION

Secondary lymphedema is the abnormal collection of lymphatic fluid within subcutaneous structures. Patients with lymphedema suffer a low quality of life. In our study, we aim to provide a systematic review of the current data on patient outcomes regarding breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL), and the most prevalent reconstructive techniques.

METHODS

A PubMed (MEDLINE) and Scopus literature search was performed in September 2020. Studies were screened based on inclusion/exclusion criteria. The protocol was registered at the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO), and it was reported in line with the PRISMA statement (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses).

RESULTS

The search yielded 254 papers from 2010 to 2020. 67 were included in our study. Lymphaticovenous anastomosis (LVA)-a minimally invasive procedure diverting the lymph into the dermal venous drainage system-combined with postoperative bandaging and compression garments yields superior results with minimal donor site lymphedema morbidity. Vascularized lymph node transfer (VLNT)-another microsurgical technique, often combined with autologous free flap breast reconstruction-improves lymphedema and brachial plexus neuropathies, and reduces the risk of cellulitis. The combination of LVA and VLNT or with other methods maximizes their effectiveness. Vascularized lymph vessel transfer (VLVT) consists of harvesting certain lymph vessels, sparing the donor site's lymph nodes.

CONCLUSION

Together with integrated lymphedema therapy, proper staging, and appropriate selection of procedure, safe and efficient surgical techniques can be beneficial to many patients with BCRL.

The Learning Curve: Trends in the First 100 Immediate Lymphatic Reconstructions Performed at a Single Institution

BACKGROUND

Cancer-related lymphedema will affect 10% to 50% of breast cancer survivors. Early data show that immediate lymphatic reconstruction may help prevent breast cancer lymphedema; however, the details have not been fully elucidated. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the cohort of our first 100 patients for trends in demographics, treatment, and technique.

METHODS

At a tertiary care cancer center, high-risk breast cancer-related lymphedema patients underwent axillary reverse lymphatic mapping and immediate lymphatic reconstruction. After institutional review board approval, demographics, technique, and outcomes were recorded. The first 100 patients were analyzed to compare the differences between the first 50 versus the second 50 patient cohorts.

RESULTS

Of the first 100 axillary reverse lymphatic mapping performed, there was a significant difference in neoadjuvant chemotherapy with 81% in the earlier cohort versus 98% in the later cohort (P = 0.01). An arborized technique was used more frequently in the second cohort (82% vs 54%, P = 0.01). The incidence of lymphedema was lower in the latter cohort (7 patients vs 1 patient, P = 0.03). The first cohort was 12.2 times more likely to develop lymphedema despite lymphatic reconstruction than the second cohort (P = 0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

The data demonstrate multiple trends in the learning curve associated with immediate lymphatic reconstruction at a single institution including improvements in identifying and dissecting lymphatic structures, performing more anastomoses per patient, using the arborized technique more frequently, performing the operation with shorter operative times, and reducing the incidence of lymphedema.

Prospective Validation of Indocyanine Green Lymphangiography Staging of Breast Cancer-Related Lymphedema

Simple Summary

Indocyanine green lymphangiography (ICG-L) allows real-time investigation of lymphatics; however, the applicability in evaluating breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) is sparse and not well established. In this prospective study, we aimed to validate ICG-L assessment of BCRL in a large patient group. We found that evaluation of BCRL with ICG-L was easy and safe to perform in the outpatient clinic and provided unique disease information unobtainable by clinical assessment alone. Future studies that evaluate the efficacy of therapeutic treatments on lymphatic function morphology should incorporate lymphatic imaging as an outcome.

Abstract

Indocyanine green lymphangiography (ICG-L) allows real-time investigation of lymphatics. Plastic surgeons performing lymphatic reconstruction use the ICG-L for patient selection and stratification using the MD Anderson (MDA) and the Arm Dermal Backflow (ADB) grading systems. However, the applicability of ICG-L in evaluating breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) is sparse and not well established. This study comprehensively examines the usability of ICG-L in the assessment of BCRL. We prospectively performed ICG-L in 237 BCRL patients between January 2019 and February 2020. The aim of this study was to assess the interrater and intrarater agreement and interscale consensus of ratings made using the MDA and ADB scales. Three independent raters performed a total of 2607 ICG-L assessments. The ICG-L stage for each grading system was correlated to the lymphedema volume to assess the agreement between the ICG-L stage and clinical severity. The interrater agreement was near perfect for the MDA scale (kappa 0.82–0.90) and the ADB scale (kappa 0.80–0.91). Similarly, we found a near-perfect intrarater agreement for the MDA scale (kappa 0.84–0.94) and the ADB scale (kappa 0.88–0.89). The agreement between the MDA and the ADB scales was substantial (kappa 0.65–0.68); however, the ADB scale systematically overestimated lower ICG-L stages compared to the MDA scale. The volume of lymphedema correlated slightly with MDA stage (Spearmans rho = 0.44, p < 0.001) and ADB stage (r_s = 0.35, p < 0.001). No serious adverse events occurred. The staging of BCRL with ICG-L is reliable, safe, and provides unique disease information unobtainable with clinical measurements alone. The MDA scale seems to provide better disease stratification compared to the ADB scale.

State-of-the-Art Lymphedema Surgery Treatment Program

The purpose of this article is to describe the multidisciplinary lymphedema surgery treatment program at Washington University in St. Louis. In this article, we discuss our collaboration with colleagues in medicine and therapy for conservative management and lymphedema staging. We describe our preferred imaging modalities for diagnosis, staging, and surgical treatment. Finally, we provide an overview of the surgical procedures we perform and our surgical treatment algorithm.

Power-Assisted Liposuction: An Important Tool in the Surgical Management of Lymphedema Patients

Background: Debulking via power-assisted liposuction has been established internationally as the gold standard for patients with chronic fat-dominant lymphedema. In this study we share our experience implementing a debulking surgery program in the United States. Methods and Results: A retrospective review was performed of patients who underwent debulking surgery using power-assisted liposuction at a single institution. Between December 2017 and January 2020, 39 patients with lymphedema underwent 41 extremity debulking procedures. In patients with lymphedema of the upper extremity, median excess volume reduction was 111% at 6 months and 116% at 12 months post-operatively. In patients with lymphedema of the lower extremity, excess volume reduction was 82% at 6 months and 115% at 12 months post-operatively. L-Dex and quality of life improved across all domains in upper and lower extremity patients as well. Conclusion: Debulking with power-assisted liposuction is an effective treatment for chronic lymphedema, supported by improvement in both objective and subjective metrics.