4.3 Article

Efficacy and early results after combining laparoscopic harvest of double gastroepiploic lymph node flap and active physiotherapy for lower extremity lymphedema

Journal

MICROSURGERY
Volume 39, Issue 8, Pages 679-687

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/micr.30511

Keywords

-

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background Lymph node flap transfer has gradually gained popularity for the treatment of upper and lower limb lymphedema. The aim of this study is to present the outcomes of an integrated treatment protocol based on double gastroepiploic lymph node flap (DG-VLN) and active physiotherapy in patients affected by Stage II and III lower extremity lymphedema. Methods All Stage II and III lower limb lymphedema patients operated between September 2015 and December 2017 were retrospectively identified and only those treated with an integrated approach of DG-VLN flap and active physiotherapy were included. Outcomes were assessed clinically with limb circumference measurement and radiologically with lymphoscintigraphy. Flap viability was evaluated through indocyanine green lymphography. Lymphedema related quality of life was evaluated preop and at 1 year follow up through LYMQOL questionnaire. Results Sixteen patients met inclusion criteria. Mean follow up was 26.2 months. Significant reduction in lower limb volume was observed for all patients from pre to post intervention. At 3 months of follow up, the mean CRR was 42.4% at below knee (BK) level and 25.4% at above knee (AK) level. At 12 months of follow up, the mean CRR was 58.3% at BK level (p = .001*) and 43.4% at AK level (p < .04*). LYMQOL metrics showed significantly better scores in all domains. Conclusions Patients with lower limb lymphedema can benefit from combined DG-VLN flap and active physiotherapy, as this approach seem to fasten the onset of improvement and to have a positive impact on patients' quality of life.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available