Challenges in lower limb lymphoedema assessment based on limb volume change: Lessons learnt from the SENTIX prospective multicentre study.


Journal

Gynecologic oncology
ISSN: 1095-6859
Titre abrégé: Gynecol Oncol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0365304

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
01 2022
Historique:
received: 14 09 2021
revised: 18 10 2021
accepted: 20 10 2021
pubmed: 13 11 2021
medline: 23 2 2022
entrez: 12 11 2021
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Lower limb lymphoedema (LLL) is the most disabling adverse effect of surgical staging of pelvic lymph nodes. However, the lack of standardisation of volumetric LLL assessment hinders direct comparison between the studies and makes LLL reporting unreliable. The aim of our study is to report outcomes from a prospective trial that have implications for LLL assessment standardisation. In the prospective international multicentre trial SENTIX, a group of 150 patients with stage IA1-IB2 cervical cancer treated by uterine surgery with bilateral sentinel lymph node biopsy was prospectively evaluated by objective LLL assessment, based on limb volume change (LVC) using circumferrential limb measurements and subjective patient-reported swelling. The assessments were conducted in six-month periods over 24 months post-surgery. Patient LVC substantially fluctuated in both positive and negative directions, which were comparable in frequency up to ±14% change. Thirty-eight patients experienced persistent LVC increase >10% classified as LLL, with nine months median time to onset. Some 34.2% of cases experienced onset later than one year after the surgery. Thirty-three patients (22%) experienced transient oedema characterised as LVC >10%, which resolved without intervention between two consequent follow-up visits. No significant correlation between LVC >10% and a patient-reported swelling was observed. Given that we observed comparable fluctuations of the the lower-limb volumes after surgical treatment of cervical cancer in both positive and negative direction up to ±14%, the diagnostic threshold for LLL diagnosis based on LVC should be increased to >15% LVC. The distinction of transient oedema from persistent LLL requires repeated measurements. Also, as one-third of LLL cases are diagnosed >1-year post-surgery, a sufficient follow-up duration needs to be ensured. Patient-reported swelling correlated poorly with LVC and should only be used as an adjunct to objective LLL assessment. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02494063.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
Lower limb lymphoedema (LLL) is the most disabling adverse effect of surgical staging of pelvic lymph nodes. However, the lack of standardisation of volumetric LLL assessment hinders direct comparison between the studies and makes LLL reporting unreliable. The aim of our study is to report outcomes from a prospective trial that have implications for LLL assessment standardisation.
METHODS
In the prospective international multicentre trial SENTIX, a group of 150 patients with stage IA1-IB2 cervical cancer treated by uterine surgery with bilateral sentinel lymph node biopsy was prospectively evaluated by objective LLL assessment, based on limb volume change (LVC) using circumferrential limb measurements and subjective patient-reported swelling. The assessments were conducted in six-month periods over 24 months post-surgery.
RESULTS
Patient LVC substantially fluctuated in both positive and negative directions, which were comparable in frequency up to ±14% change. Thirty-eight patients experienced persistent LVC increase >10% classified as LLL, with nine months median time to onset. Some 34.2% of cases experienced onset later than one year after the surgery. Thirty-three patients (22%) experienced transient oedema characterised as LVC >10%, which resolved without intervention between two consequent follow-up visits. No significant correlation between LVC >10% and a patient-reported swelling was observed.
CONCLUSIONS
Given that we observed comparable fluctuations of the the lower-limb volumes after surgical treatment of cervical cancer in both positive and negative direction up to ±14%, the diagnostic threshold for LLL diagnosis based on LVC should be increased to >15% LVC. The distinction of transient oedema from persistent LLL requires repeated measurements. Also, as one-third of LLL cases are diagnosed >1-year post-surgery, a sufficient follow-up duration needs to be ensured. Patient-reported swelling correlated poorly with LVC and should only be used as an adjunct to objective LLL assessment.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02494063.

Identifiants

pubmed: 34763939
pii: S0090-8258(21)01530-4
doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2021.10.089
pii:
doi:

Banques de données

ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT02494063']

Types de publication

Journal Article Multicenter Study Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

76-84

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Declaration of Competing Interest None declared.

Auteurs

Martina Borčinová (M)

Gynecologic Oncology Centre, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, First Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and General University Hospital, Central and Eastern European Gynecologic Oncology Group, CEEGOG, Prague, Czech Republic.

Volker Ragosch (V)

Department of Special Operative and Oncologic Gynaecology, Asklepios-Clinic Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany.

Jiří Jarkovský (J)

Institute of Biostatistics and Analyses, Faculty of Medicine, Masaryk University, Brno, Czech Republic.

Sylva Bajsová (S)

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Hospital Ostrava, Central and Eastern European Gynecologic Oncology Group, CEEGOG, Ostrava Poruba, Czech Republic.

Radovan Pilka (R)

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, Palacky University, University Hospital Olomouc, Central and Eastern European Gynecologic Oncology Group, CEEGOG, Olomouc, Czech Republic.

Ariel Glickman (A)

Unit of Gynecological Oncology, Institute Clinic of Gynaecology, Obstetrics, and Neonatology, Hospital Clinic-Institut d'Investigacions Biomediques August Pi i Sunyer (IDIBAPS), University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.

Sonia Garrido-Mallach (S)

Gynecologic Oncology Unit, La Paz University Hospital, Madrid, Spain.

Francesco Raspagliesi (F)

Fondazione IRCCS Instituto Nazionale Tumori, Milan, Italy.

Wiktor Szatkowski (W)

M. Sklodowska-Curie Memorial Institute, Krakow, Poland.

Maja Pakiz (M)

University medical Centre Maribor, Slovenia.

Leon C Snyman (LC)

Kalafong Provincial Tertiary Hospital, South Africa.

Roman Kocián (R)

Gynecologic Oncology Centre, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, First Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and General University Hospital, Central and Eastern European Gynecologic Oncology Group, CEEGOG, Prague, Czech Republic.

Karl Tamussino (K)

Medical University Graz, Austria.

Vladimír Kalist (V)

Krajská nemocnice T. Bati, A.S., Zlín, Czech Republic.

Martin Michal (M)

Nemocnice České Budějovice, Czech Republic.

Myriam Gracia Segovia (MG)

Hospital Clinico San Carlos, Madrid, Spain.

Robert Poka (R)

Department of obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Debrecen, Hungary.

Barbara Kipp (B)

Neue Freuenklinik, Luzerner Kantonsspital, Switzerland.

Grzegorz Szewczyk (G)

Institute of Mother and Child, Warsaw, Poland.

Dariusz Wydra (D)

The University Clinical Centre in Gdansk, Poland.

Róbert Tóth (R)

Oncology Institute of East Slovakia, Košice, Slovakia.

Alla Vinnytska (A)

LISOD - Israeli Oncological Hospital, Plyuty, Ukraine.

Daniela Fischerová (D)

Gynecologic Oncology Centre, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, First Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and General University Hospital, Central and Eastern European Gynecologic Oncology Group, CEEGOG, Prague, Czech Republic.

Kathrin Siegler (K)

Department of Special Operative and Oncologic Gynaecology, Asklepios-Clinic Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany.

David Cibula (D)

Gynecologic Oncology Centre, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, First Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and General University Hospital, Central and Eastern European Gynecologic Oncology Group, CEEGOG, Prague, Czech Republic. Electronic address: dc@davidcibula.cz.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH