Breast Lymphedema After Conservative Breast Surgery: An Up-to-date Systematic Review

Abstract Background While arm lymphedema following breast cancer treatment is a common complication; breast lymphedema following treatment is not uncommon. Several risk factors were found to contribute to breast lymphedema, Aim: We aimed to provide a systematic review to help avoiding or management of breast lymphoedema Method The search term 'breast lymphedema' was combined with 'breast conservative surgery' and was used to conduct literature research in PubMed and Medline. The term lymphedema was combined with breast, conservative and surgery to search Embase database. All papers published in English were included with no exclusion date limits Results A total of 2155 female patients were included in this review; age ranged from 26 to 90. Mean BMI was 28.4, most of the studies included patients who underwent conservative breast surgery. Incidence of breast lymphedema ranged from 24.8% to 90.4%. Several risk factors were linked to breast lymphedema after conservative breast surgery, such as body mass index (BMI), breast size, tumour size, tumour site, type of surgery and adjuvant therapy. Treatment options focused on decongestive lymphatic therapy, including Manual lymphatic drainage (MLD), self-massaging, compression bras or Kinesio taping. Conclusions Breast lymphedema is a relatively common complication, yet there is no clear consensus on the definition or treatment options.

Download Full-text

P28 Breast Lymphedema after breast conservative surgery; an up-to-date systematic review

BJS Open ◽

10.1093/bjsopen/zrab032.027 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 5 (Supplement_1) ◽

Author(s):

Mohamed Abouelazayem ◽

Mohamed Elkorety ◽

Sherif Monib ◽

Mohamed Abouelazayem

Keyword(s):

Breast Cancer ◽

Risk Factors ◽

Systematic Review ◽

Body Mass Index ◽

Breast Surgery ◽

Treatment Options ◽

Conservative Surgery ◽

Common Complication ◽

Breast Conservative Surgery ◽

Conservative Breast Surgery

Abstract Background While arm lymphedema following breast cancer treatment is a common complication; breast lymphedema following treatment is not uncommon. Several risk factors were found to contribute to breast lymphedema, including axillary surgery, high BMI, increased bra cup size, adjuvant chemotherapy, locoregional and radiotherapy boost and upper outer quadrant tumours. Aim We aimed to provide an up to date systematic review to help avoiding or managing breast lymphoedema after Breast conservative surgery for breast cancer. Methods The search term 'breast lymphedema' was combined with 'breast conservative surgery' and was used to conduct a literature research in PubMed and Medline. The term lymphedema was combined with breast, conservative and surgery to search Embase database. All papers published in English were included with no exclusion date limits Results A total of 2155 female patients were included in this review; age ranged from 26 to 90. Mean body mass index was 28.4, most of the studies included patients who underwent conservative breast surgery. Incidence of breast lymphedema ranged from 24.8% to 90.4%. Several risk factors were linked to breast lymphedema after conservative breast surgery, such as body mass index (BMI), breast size, tumour size, tumour site, type of surgery and adjuvant therapy. Treatment options focused on decongestive lymphatic therapy, including Manual lymphatic drainage (MLD), self-massaging, compression bras or Kinesio taping. Conclusion Breast lymphedema is a relatively common complication, yet there is no clear consensus on the definition or treatment options.

Download Full-text

Radiotherapy following conservative breast surgery using an asymmetric collimator technique

Clinical Oncology ◽

10.1016/s0936-6555(05)81241-5 ◽

1991 ◽

Vol 3 ◽

pp. 296-296 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Keyword(s):

Breast Surgery ◽

Conservative Breast Surgery

Download Full-text

Medical Tourism in Aesthetic Breast Surgery: A Systematic Review

Aesthetic Plastic Surgery ◽

10.1007/s00266-021-02251-1 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Susan McCrossan ◽

Serena Martin ◽

Christopher Hill

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Medical Tourism ◽

Breast Surgery ◽

Aesthetic Breast

Download Full-text

PROSPECT guideline for oncological breast surgery: a systematic review and procedure‐specific postoperative pain management recommendations

Anaesthesia ◽

10.1111/anae.14964 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 75 (5) ◽

pp. 664-673 ◽

Cited By ~ 13

Author(s):

A. Jacobs ◽

A. Lemoine ◽

G. P. Joshi ◽

M. Van de Velde ◽

F. Bonnet ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Pain Management ◽

Postoperative Pain ◽

Breast Surgery ◽

Postoperative Pain Management ◽

Management Recommendations

Download Full-text

Quality of Patient-Reported Outcome Studies Utilizing the BREAST-Q: A Systematic Review

Aesthetic Surgery Journal ◽

10.1093/asj/sjab057 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Lior Har-Shai ◽

Sar-El Ofek ◽

Addy Brandstetter ◽

Keren H Cohen ◽

Tamir Shay ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Plastic Surgery ◽

Survey Research ◽

Breast Surgery ◽

Sample Size Calculation ◽

Patient Reported Outcome ◽

Validated Questionnaire ◽

Patient Reported ◽

Current Guidance

Abstract Background Patient-reported outcome (PRO) studies are essential the assessment of surgical procedures in plastic surgery. An accepted and validated questionnaire is the Breast-Q. Objectives This study aims to assess the quality of PRO studies in plastic surgery utilizing the Breast-Q questionnaire. Methods This study included two steps: (1) A systematic review of 23 key-criteria assessing the quality of survey-research in studies utilizing the Breast-Q which were published between 2015-2018; (2) Review of current guidance for survey-research in journals related to Plastic Surgery and Breast Surgery which were included in the systematic review. Results 79 studies were included in the systematic review. Many key-criteria were poorly reported: 51.9% of the studies did not provide a defined response rate and almost 90% did not provide a method for analysis of non-response error. 67.1% lacked a description of the sample's representativeness of the population of interest, and 82.3% did not present a sample size calculation. 11.4% of papers failed to describe the data analyzing methods; in 27.8% the data analysis which was presented could not allow replication of the results. Of the 16 journals in Plastic Surgery and Breast Surgery that their "Instruction to Authors" were reviewed, 15 (93.7%) did not provide any guidance for survey reporting. Conclusions The majority of key criteria are under-reported by authors publishing their survey-research in peer-reviewed journals in the fields of plastic and breast surgery. There is an urgent need for constructing a well-developed reporting guideline for survey-research in plastic surgery and particularly in breast surgery.

Download Full-text