Liposuction and Controlled Compression Therapy Reduce the Erysipelas Incidence in Primary and Secondary Lymphedema

The VASCERN PPL working group patient pathway for primary and paediatric lymphoedema

Lymphoedema is caused by an imbalance between fluid production and transport by the lymphatic system. This imbalance can be either caused by reduced transport capacity of the lymphatic system or too much fluid production and leads to swelling associated with tissue changes (skin thickening, fat deposition). Its main common complication is the increased risk of developing cellulitis/erysipelas in the affected area, which can worsen the lymphatic function and can be the cause of raised morbidity of the patient if not treated correctly/urgently. The term primary lymphoedema covers a group of rare conditions caused by abnormal functioning and/or development of the lymphatic system. It covers a highly heterogeneous group of conditions. An accurate diagnosis of primary lymphoedema is crucial for the implementation of an optimal treatment plan and management, as well as to reduce the risk of worsening. Patient care is diverse across Europe, and national specialised centres and networks are not available everywhere. The European Reference Network on Rare Multisystemic Vascular Diseases (VASCERN) gathers the best expertise in Europe and provide accessible cross-border healthcare to patients with rare vascular diseases. There are six different working groups in VASCERN, which focus on arterial diseases, hereditary haemorrhagic telangiectasia, neurovascular diseases, lymphoedema and vascular anomalies. The working group Paediatric and Primary Lymphedema (PPL WG) gathers and shares knowledge and expertise in the diagnosis and management of adults and children with primary and paediatric lymphoedema. The members of PPL WG have worked together to produce this opinion statement reflecting strategies on how to approach patients with primary and paediatric lymphoedema. The objective of this patient pathway is to improve patient care by reducing the time to diagnosis, define the best management and follow-up strategies and avoid overuse of resources. Therefore, the patient pathway describes the clinical evaluation and investigations that lead to a clinical diagnosis, the genetic testing, differential diagnosis, the management and treatment options and the patient follow up at expert and local centres. Also, the importance of the patient group participation in the PPL WG is discussed.

Liposuction for Advanced Lymphedema in a Multidisciplinary Team Setting in Australia: 5-Year Follow-Up

BACKGROUND

Liposuction for International Society of Lymphology late stage 2 or 3 limb lymphedema is an established surgical option to remove excessive adipose tissue deposition and has been performed in Australia since 2012 at the Australian Lymphoedema Education, Research, and Treatment (ALERT) Program of Macquarie University.

METHODS

Between May of 2012 and May of 2017, 72 patients with unilateral primary or secondary lymphedema of the arm or leg underwent suction-assisted lipectomy using the Brorson protocol. This prospective study presents 59 of these patients who had consented to research with a 5-year follow-up.

RESULTS

Of the 59 patients, 54 (92%) were women, 30 (51%) had leg lymphedema, and 29 (49%) had arm lymphedema. For patients with arm lymphedema, the median preoperative volume difference between the lymphedematous and the contralateral arm was 1061 mL, which was reduced to 79 mL 1 year after surgery and to 22 mL 5 years after surgery. For patients with leg lymphedema, the median preoperative volume difference was 3447 mL, which was reduced to 263 mL 1 year after surgery but increased to 669 mL 5 years after surgery.

CONCLUSION

Suction-assisted lipectomy is a long-term option for the management of selected patients with International Society of Lymphology late stage 2 or 3 limb lymphedema when conservative management can offer no further improvement.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic, IV.

Lymphatic venous anastomosis and complex decongestive therapy for lymphoedema: randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Lymphatic venous anastomosis is associated with a low incidence of lower extremity lymphoedema-associated cellulitis; however, the exact relationship is unknown. This multicentre RCT evaluated the effect of lymphatic venous anastomosis on prevention of cellulitis.

METHODS

Patients with secondary lower extremity lymphoedema who underwent at least 3 months of non-operative decongestive therapy were assigned randomly to lymphatic venous anastomosis or conservative therapy. The primary and secondary outcomes were cellulitis frequency, and assessments of circumference, hardness, and pain respectively.

RESULTS

Overall, 336 patients were divided into two groups: 225 in the full-analysis set (primary outcome 225; secondary outcomes 170) and 156 in the per-protocol set (primary outcome 156; secondary outcomes 110). In both analyses, lymphatic venous anastomosis with non-operative decongestive therapy was more effective in preventing cellulitis than non-operative decongestive therapy alone; the difference between groups in reducing cellulitis frequency over 6 months was -0.35 (95 per cent c.i. -0.62 to -0.09; P = 0.010) in the full-analysis set (FAS) and -0.60 (-0.94 to -0.27; P = 0.001) in the per-protocol set (PPS) Limb circumference and pain were not significantly different, but lymphatic venous anastomosis reduced thigh area hardness (proximal medial and distal and lateral proximal). Four patients experienced contact dermatitis with non-operative decongestive therapy alone.

CONCLUSION

Lymphatic venous anastomosis in combination with non-operative decongestive therapy prevents cellulitis.

REGISTRATION NUMBER

UMIN00025137, UMIN00031462.

Conservative treatment versus lymphaticovenular anastomosis for early-stage lower extremity lymphedema

OBJECTIVE

Several options for the treatment of lower extremity lymphedema (LEL) can be broadly classified into conservative treatment, such as compression garments and decongestive lymphatic therapy, and surgical treatment, such as lymphaticovenular anastomosis (LVA). The purpose of our study was to clarify the superiority of these treatments by comparing the outcomes of LVA with those of conservative treatment for early-stage LEL.

METHODS

We performed a single-center, retrospective cohort study. The patients with LEL who presented to our department between January 2015 and December 2022 were identified and classified into two groups: conservative treatment and surgical treatment. The LEL indexes, calculated from the four lower extremity circumferences and the body mass index, were compared at the 6-, 12-, and 24-month follow-up between the two groups.

RESULTS

Of the 101 patients with LEL, 53 with 72 affected limbs (conservative treatment, 39 patients and 53 affected limbs; surgical treatment, 15 patients and 19 affected limbs) were included in the present analysis. The therapeutic effect for reducing edema, as determined by comparing the corrected LEL index at 12 months (103.7 ± 12.7 vs 91.9 ± 10.7; P = .005) and 24 months (103.1 ± 12.9 vs 83.8 ± 7.2; P < .001), was significantly higher in the surgical treatment group than that in the conservative treatment group. The conservative treatment group showed little change in the corrected LEL index at ≤24 months of follow-up (+3.1%; P = .299). In contrast, the surgical treatment group showed a significant reduction in edema at 24 months according to the corrected LEL index (-16.2%; P = .019).

CONCLUSIONS

In early-stage LEL, conservative treatment centered on compression therapy alone only maintained edema (ie, edema did not worsen or improve). In contrast, LVA with compression therapy reduced edema.