The effectiveness and safety of heat/cold therapy in adults with lymphoedema: systematic review

PURPOSE

The aim of this review is to assess the efficacy and safety of using heat and cold therapy for adults with lymphoedema.

METHODS

A multi-database search was undertaken. Only studies which included adults with lymphoedema who were treated with heat or cold therapy reporting any outcome were included. Screening, data extraction, and assessment of bias were undertaken by a single reviewer and verified by a second. Due to the substantial heterogeneity, a descriptive synthesis was undertaken.

RESULTS

Eighteen studies were included. All nine studies which assessed the effects of heat-therapy on changes in limb circumference reported a point estimate indicating some reduction from baseline to end of study. Similarly, the five studies evaluating the use of heat-therapy on limb volume demonstrated a reduction in limb volume from baseline to end-of-study. Only four studies reported adverse events of which all were deemed to be minor. Only two studies explored the effects of cold therapy on lymphoedema.

CONCLUSIONS

Tentative evidence suggests heat-therapy may have some benefit in treating lymphoedema with minimal side effects. However, further high-quality randomised controlled trials are required, with a particular focus on moderating factors and assessment of adverse events.

Lymphatic Pain in Breast Cancer Survivors

Background: Breast cancer survivors who report chronic pain in the affected ipsilateral upper limb or body are nearly twice as likely to develop lymphedema. Little is known about lymphatic pain, defined as co-occurring pain and swelling in the affected ipsilateral upper limb or body. The study aimed to examine the predictors and effects of lymphatic pain on breast cancer survivors' activities of daily living (ADLs). Materials and Methods: A sample of 568 patients was recruited in a metropolitan cancer center in the United States. Demographic and clinical data were collected. Body mass index (BMI) and limb volume were measured using infra-red perometer. Lymphatic pain and ADLs were measured by the Lymphedema and Breast Cancer Symptom Experience Index. Parametric and nonparametric tests and generalized linear models were used to analyze data. Results: Lymphatic pain affected 33% of survivors. Significant predictors of lymphatic pain included younger age, higher BMI, financial hardship, and a diagnosis of lymphedema. Patients with a diagnosis of lymphedema had 9.68 odds (confidence interval [CI]: 5.78-16.63; p < 0.001) and those with financial hardship had 4.64 odds (CI: 1.99-11.32; p = 0.001) of experiencing lymphatic pain. Patients with lymphatic pain had more impairments in ADLs (p < 0.001) compared to patients with only pain, only swelling, and no symptoms. Significantly more patients with lymphatic pain had a limb volume difference of >5% and >10% compared to patients with only pain and no symptom. Conclusion: This study is the first to report that in a large sample of patients, 33.1% experienced lymphatic pain and that lymphatic pain was associated with significant impairments in ADLs. Findings suggest that lymphatic pain may be due to abnormal accumulation of lymph fluid. Research is needed to ascertain the physiological mechanisms that underlie lymphatic pain and determine whether strategies to prevent and treat lymphedema can decrease lymphatic pain.

Manual Lymphedema Drainage for Reducing Risk for and Managing Breast Cancer-Related Lymphedema After Breast Surgery: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

To examine the effects of manual lymphatic drainage (MLD) on reducing the risk of and managing breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL).

DATA SOURCES

The electronic databases ScienceDirect, Scopus, PubMed, and CINAHL were searched for articles published in the English language from January 2000 to June 2020.

STUDY SELECTION

A total of 518 articles were retrieved. After the removal of duplicates, 472 articles remained, 433 of which were excluded based on title and abstract consideration. Thereafter, 39 studies were further inspected, and 27 articles were excluded because they were not randomized controlled trials, did not measure BCRL, and/or were an incomplete study. Ten studies were included for the final review.

DATA EXTRACTION

Data from the 10 studies were extracted and compiled into a summary table.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Based on the results of this systematic review, it cannot be concluded that MLD helps reduce the risk of BCRL for women after breast surgery. Regarding the effect of MLD on managing BCRL, the findings indicate that MLD alone or MLD combined with other treatments was likely to give similar benefits in terms of reducing arm volume for women diagnosed with BCRL.

CONCLUSION

Scientific evidence to support the benefits of MLD on preventing or reducing BCRL remains unclear. More rigorous studies to confirm findings on the effectiveness of MLD are needed.

Non-cancer-related lower limb lymphoedema in complex decongestive therapy: the patient experience

OBJECTIVE

Lymphoedema is a debilitating condition that results in the swelling of one or more limbs, leading to a significant impairment of mobility. From a psychosocial perspective, body image and quality of life (QoL) are also adversely affected. To date, non-cancer lymphoedema has been under-researched. The primary objectives of this study were to explore QoL and limb volume in patients with primary and secondary non-cancer-related lower limb lymphoedema during the intensive, maintenance and self-care phases of complex decongestive therapy over a 24-week period. Secondary objectives included exploring patients' experiences of living with lymphoedema and the challenges of self-care maintenance.

METHOD

A sequential mixed methodology, using quantitative and qualitative methods, was used. The quantitative part of the study involved the use of tape measurements at 4cm intervals to ascertain limb volume alterations. Measurements were taken during the intensive phase at weeks 1, 2, 3 and 4; and during the maintenance phase at weeks 8, 16 and 24. QoL was measured using the lymphoedema QoL (LYMQOL) leg, at baseline and weeks 8 and 24. The qualitative part of the study involved the use of semi-structured interviews with patients at week 8. Interviews explored the experiences of patients living with lymphoedema and their experiences of complex decongestive therapy.

RESULTS

A total of 20 patients were recruited, two male and 18 female, with a mean age of 58.8 years (standard deviation (SD): 16 years), and all receiving complex decongestive therapy. At baseline, for all patients, the mean QoL score was 4.3 (SD: 2.4); and 8 (SD: 1.5) after 8 weeks of complex decongestive therapy. Mean difference was 4.00 (95% confidence interval: 2.76-5.24; p=0.00001) indicating a positive treatment effect. Limb volume measurements demonstrated a reduction in oedema from baseline to week 8. However, there were fluctuations in limb volume over the maintenance period of four months after treatment as the patients endeavoured to engage in self-care. Analysis of the interviews identified themes pertaining to lack of knowledge of lymphoedema among health professionals, a negative impact of living with lymphoedema and the positive therapeutic effect of complex decongestive therapy.

CONCLUSION

Lower limb lymphoedema is a chronic condition that impacts negatively on the individual. Complex decongestive therapy improves QoL and reduces oedema. However, given the fluctuations in oedema post-treatment, individuals need greater support to maintain active engagement in effective self-care strategies.

Fluid Volume Management in Prosthesis Users: Augmenting Panel Release with Pin Release

BACKGROUND

Management of fluid in the limbs is a challenge faced by people with disabilities. In prosthetics, a means for transtibial prosthesis users to stabilize their residual limb fluid volume during the day may improve socket fit.

OBJECTIVE

To determine if releasing the panels and locking pin of a cabled-panel adjustable socket during socket release significantly improved limb fluid volume recovery and retention over releasing the panels alone.

DESIGN

Repeated-measures experiment to assess the effects on limb fluid volume retention.

SETTING

Participants were tested in a laboratory setting while walking on a treadmill.

INTERVENTION

Release of a locking pin tether during sitting as a limb volume accommodation strategy.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

Percent limb fluid volume retention for panel and pin release compared with panel release alone at 2 minutes (short term) and 50 minutes (long term) after subsequent activity. Limb fluid volume was monitored using bioimpedance analysis.

RESULTS

Median percent limb fluid volume retention for the panel and pin release was significantly greater than panel release alone for both anterior and posterior regions for the long term (P = .0499 and .0096, respectively) but not the short term (P = .0712 and .1580, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Augmenting panel release with pin release may be an effective accommodation strategy for prosthesis users with transtibial amputation to better retain limb fluid volume.

Lower limb dominance and volume in healthy individuals

Upper limb dominance is associated with increased limb volume, however there is a paucity of evidence if this is true for the lower limbs. This study investigated if there is a normative volume difference between the dominant and nondominant leg. Healthy volunteers between the ages of 18-40 years were recruited. Exclusion criteria included previous lower limb surgery, BMI >30, or pregnancy. An experienced lymphedema nurse specialist measured the circumference of each limb at 4 cm intervals from the malleolus to the groin. Measurements were used to calculate volume of each limb in milliliters. 100 (52 male, 48 female) participants met our inclusion criteria. 86% were right leg dominant and 14% left leg dominant. 93% demonstrated an average increased volume of 349 ml (4.5%) in the dominant leg which is statistically significant (p<0.001). Age, sports, and gender did not affect lower limb volumes. This is the first study to show a normative variance in leg volume in healthy individuals, with a greater volume in the dominant leg. This should be taken into consideration when managing and measuring outcomes for patients with conditions resulting in enlarged lower limbs.

Post-doffing residual limb fluid volume change in people with trans-tibial amputation

BACKGROUND

Residual limb volume may change after doffing, affecting the limb shape measured and used as a starting point for socket design.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to compare residual limb fluid volume changes after doffing for different test configurations.

STUDY DESIGN

The study was a repeated measures experimental design with three conditions (Sit, Liner, and Walk).

METHODS

Residual limb fluid volume on 30 people with trans-tibial amputation was measured using bioimpedance analysis. Three tests were conducted--Sit: sit for 10 minutes, remove the prosthesis, socks and liner, sit for 10 minutes; Liner: sit for 10 minutes, remove the prosthesis and socks but not the liner, sit for 10 minutes; Walk: conduct sit, stand and walk activities for 30 minutes, remove the prosthesis, socks and liner, sit for 10 minutes.

RESULTS

The percentage fluid volume increase after doffing was significantly higher for Walk (2.8%) than for Sit (1.8%) (p = 0.03). The time to achieve a maximum or stable fluid volume was shorter for Liner (4.3 min) than for Sit (6.6 min) (p = 0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

Activity before doffing intensified the post-doffing limb fluid volume increase. Maintaining a liner after doffing caused limb fluid volume to stabilize faster than removing the liner. Clinical relevance To minimize residual limb volume increase before casting or imaging, practitioners should have patients sit with their prosthesis donned for 10 minutes. Leaving a liner on the residuum will not reduce the post-doffing volume increase, but it will help to more quickly achieve a consistent limb fluid volume.