{"title":"Immediate lymphatic reconstruction for prevention of secondary lymphedema in cancer patients: A meta-analysis of 42 studies","authors":"Jianing Du, Ao Fu, Chunjun Liu","doi":"10.1016/j.bjps.2025.06.038","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Secondary lymphedema, a common complication following lymph node dissection, affecting up to 53% of cancer survivors, imposes significant morbidity and reduced quality of life. Immediate lymphatic reconstruction (ILR) has emerged as a preventive strategy; however, its efficacy remains unclear.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>We conducted a PRISMA/AMSTAR-compliant systematic review and meta-analysis. A comprehensive search of PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science (2009–2024) identified studies evaluating ILR for lymphedema prevention. Random-effects models were used to calculate pooled odds ratios (ORs) for comparative studies and pooled incidence proportions for single-arm studies, each with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Subgroup analyses examined extremity site, follow-up duration, BMI, and study design. Publication bias was assessed with funnel plots and Egger’s test.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>We included 42 studies with a total of 4539 patients. Among comparative studies, ILR was associated with roughly a 75% reduction in lymphedema risk (pooled OR = 0.25, 95% CI 0.17–0.36, p=0.004). A temporal decline in ILR’s protective effect was observed: OR 0.11 at <1 year follow-up versus OR 0.41 at ≥2 years (p=0.003). Across 19 single-arm studies, the pooled lymphedema incidence after ILR was 7.34% (95% CI 4.97–10.71%), rising to ∼20% in studies with >2 years of follow-up. Heterogeneity among studies was moderate (I² = 51%). Funnel plots indicated potential publication bias in comparative studies (Egger’s test: z=−2.14, p=0.032), but not in single-arm studies (p=0.105).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>ILR reduces the risk of cancer-related secondary lymphedema, particularly for breast cancer patients in the early postoperative period. Standardized surgical protocols and prolonged follow-up are needed to optimize and confirm long-term benefits.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":50084,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Plastic Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery","volume":"107 ","pages":"Pages 214-227"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Plastic Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1748681525004097","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background
Secondary lymphedema, a common complication following lymph node dissection, affecting up to 53% of cancer survivors, imposes significant morbidity and reduced quality of life. Immediate lymphatic reconstruction (ILR) has emerged as a preventive strategy; however, its efficacy remains unclear.
Methods
We conducted a PRISMA/AMSTAR-compliant systematic review and meta-analysis. A comprehensive search of PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science (2009–2024) identified studies evaluating ILR for lymphedema prevention. Random-effects models were used to calculate pooled odds ratios (ORs) for comparative studies and pooled incidence proportions for single-arm studies, each with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Subgroup analyses examined extremity site, follow-up duration, BMI, and study design. Publication bias was assessed with funnel plots and Egger’s test.
Results
We included 42 studies with a total of 4539 patients. Among comparative studies, ILR was associated with roughly a 75% reduction in lymphedema risk (pooled OR = 0.25, 95% CI 0.17–0.36, p=0.004). A temporal decline in ILR’s protective effect was observed: OR 0.11 at <1 year follow-up versus OR 0.41 at ≥2 years (p=0.003). Across 19 single-arm studies, the pooled lymphedema incidence after ILR was 7.34% (95% CI 4.97–10.71%), rising to ∼20% in studies with >2 years of follow-up. Heterogeneity among studies was moderate (I² = 51%). Funnel plots indicated potential publication bias in comparative studies (Egger’s test: z=−2.14, p=0.032), but not in single-arm studies (p=0.105).
Conclusion
ILR reduces the risk of cancer-related secondary lymphedema, particularly for breast cancer patients in the early postoperative period. Standardized surgical protocols and prolonged follow-up are needed to optimize and confirm long-term benefits.
期刊介绍:
JPRAS An International Journal of Surgical Reconstruction is one of the world''s leading international journals, covering all the reconstructive and aesthetic aspects of plastic surgery.
The journal presents the latest surgical procedures with audit and outcome studies of new and established techniques in plastic surgery including: cleft lip and palate and other heads and neck surgery, hand surgery, lower limb trauma, burns, skin cancer, breast surgery and aesthetic surgery.