ArticleBMJ open2024
The N-LVA Study: effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of lymphaticovenous anastomosis (LVA) for patients with cancer who suffer from chronic peripheral lymphoedema - study protocol of a multicentre, randomised sham-controlled trial.
Article in BMJ open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06082349 (Effectiveness and Cost-effectiveness of Lymphaticovenous Anastomosis for Cancer Patients Who Suffer From Chronic Peripheral Lymphedema), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 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.
Effectiveness and Cost-effectiveness of Lymphaticovenous Anastomosis for Cancer Patients Who Suffer From Chronic Peripheral Lymphedema: a Randomized Controlled Trial
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Economic evaluation of lymphaticovenous anastomosis versus conservative therapy for breast cancer-related lymphoedema: secondary outcome analysis of a randomized clinical trial.The British journal of surgery · 2026Trial
- High-frequency ultrasound combined with shear wave elastography to evaluate the efficacy of lymphaticovenular anastomosis in patients with secondary lymphedema.Frontiers in surgery · 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
9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionCancer-related lymphoedema is one of the most debilitating side-effects of cancer treatment with an overall incidence of 15.5%. Patients may suffer from a variety of symptoms, possibly resulting in a diminished health-related quality of life (HRQoL). A microsurgical technique known as lymphaticovenous anastomosis (LVA) might be a promising treatment option. The objective of this study is to evaluate whether LVA is effective and cost-effective compared with sham surgery in improving the HRQoL. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A multicentre, double-blind, randomised sham-controlled trial conducted in three university hospitals in the Netherlands. The study population comprises 110 patients over the age of 18 years with unilateral, peripheral cancer-related lymphoedema, including 70 patients with upper limb lymphoedema and 40 patients with lower limb lymphoedema. A total of 55 patients will undergo the LVA operation, while the remaining 55 will undergo sham surgery. The follow-up will be at least 24 months. Patients are encouraged to complete the follow-up by explaining the importance of the study. Furthermore, patients may benefit from regular monitoring moments for their lymphoedema. The primary outcome is the HRQoL. The secondary outcomes are the limb circumference, excess limb volume, changes in conservative therapy, postoperative complications, patency of the LVA and incremental cost-effectiveness. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study was approved by the Medical Ethical Committee of Maastricht University Medical Center on 20 September 2023 (NL84169.068.23). The results will be presented at scientific conferences and published in peer-reviewed medical journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT06082349.
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.