SynthesisJournal of vascular surgery. Venous and lymphatic disorders2024
Biomaterials in the clinical treatment of lymphedema-a systematic review.
Synthesis in Journal of vascular surgery. Venous and lymphatic disorders, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Advanced bio-implants for breast cancer-related lymphedema: pioneering implantable lymphatic regeneration devices.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2026Article
- Lymphedema: current treatment strategies and future directions in tissue engineering.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Review
- Tissue engineering approaches for lymphedema: biomaterial innovations and clinical potential.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2025Review
- Lymphatic System and the Kidney: From Lymphangiogenesis to Renal Inflammation and Fibrosis Development.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issuedCorrigendum.2026
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveLymphedema is a chronic condition caused by impaired lymphatic fluid drainage, resulting in progressive edema. The current mainstay of lymphedema therapy consists of conservative therapy and surgical therapy. In this systematic review, we investigated the novel role of biomaterials in clinical lymphedema therapy and assessed their objective outcomes and the complication rate associated with their use.
methodsStudies were identified through systematic review using the Embase and PubMed/MEDLINE databases. Only original articles reporting the use of biomaterials for clinical lymphedema therapy were included. The primary outcome measure was the objective reduction in limb volume after biomaterial use. The secondary outcome measure was the assessment of biomaterial safety.
resultsA total of 354 articles were identified in the first search, of which 10 met our inclusion criteria. These articles described the use of two biomaterials, nanofibrillar collagen scaffolds (NCSs) and silicone tubes (STs), for the treatment of lymphedema. NCS implantation showed an average excess limb volume reduction of 1% to 10.7% and clear evidence of lymphangiogenesis on imaging. No complications were 7documented after NCS implantation. ST implantation showed an average limb volume reduction of 700 to 887 mL and limb circumference reduction of 3.1 to 8 cm in patients with advanced stage lymphedema. Of 177 patients treated with ST implantation, only 11 (6.2%) developed local inflammation.
conclusionsBoth NCS and ST implantation showed promising limb volume reduction; however, with the scarce literature available, additional research is needed to determine their effectiveness. Both demonstrated good safety profiles, with no complications after NCS implantation and a complication rate equivalent to other similar implants for ST implantation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.