ReviewAnnals of translational medicine2023
Surgical management of breast cancer-related lymphedema: a narrative review of contemporary practices.
Review in Annals of translational medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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.
- Editorial: Comprehensive management and risk assessment of breast cancer-related lymphedema: a multidisciplinary approach.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Comprehensive overview of management and risk assessment of breast cancer-related lymphedema: a multidisciplinary approach.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Review
- Proximal vs. Recipient Site for Vascular Lymph Node Transfers for Breast Cancer-Related Lymphedema: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Future Applications for 3-dimensional Printed Virtual Surgical Planning in Microsurgery.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Objective: Breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) represents a colossal burden in terms of health and patient-reported outcomes. Surgical management plays a prominent role in the psychological and physical well-being of women suffering from BCRL. Therefore, we performed a narrative review of the current surgical management of BCRL and analyzed the postoperative results. Methods: A literature search was conducted across PubMed MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science from database inception through January 2, 2023. We included English-written studies evaluating postoperative outcomes of lymphatic surgery for the management of BCRL. Key Content and Findings: The surgical management of lymphedema can be classified into two approaches: (I) physiologic procedures and (II) debulking or ablative procedures. While ablative procedures are intended to lessen the symptomatic burden of lymphedema via the removal of pathological tissues, physiologic procedures are performed to restore the abnormal lymphatic flow by creating bypasses into the venous or lymphatic circulation, or by creating new lymphatic connections by means of lymphangiogenesis. Physiologic procedures generate better outcomes in the early stages of lymphedema as there is some residual physiologic flow and vessels are less fibrotic, while ablative procedures are regarded to be the best alternative in very advanced lymphedema stages. A combination of physiologic and ablative procedures provides more comprehensive surgical management to BCRL. Conclusions: Lymphedema is a common complication of breast cancer treatment with an extensive incidence range. Postoperative outcomes of the surgical management of BCRL are heterogeneous despite most studies indicating favorable results after lymphatic surgery.
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.