ArticleJournal of vascular surgery. Venous and lymphatic disorders2024
The value of the dermal rim sign on nonenhanced magnetic resonance imaging for predicting dermal backflow in patients with primary lower extremity lymphedema.
Article 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. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe dermal rim sign (DRS) on nonenhanced magnetic resonance imaging has been shown to predict dermal backflow (DBF) in patients with secondary upper limb lymphedema. However, whether the DRS has the same effects on primary lower extremity lymphedema (PLEL) has not been clearly reported. Therefore, this study aimed to explore whether the DRS can be used to diagnose DBF on lymphoscintigraphy in patients with PLEL.
methodsA total of 94 patients who were diagnosed with PLEL were recruited for this retrospective study from January 2022 to December 2023. All the patients were divided into two groups according to the lymphoscintigraphy findings: no DBF and DBF. The magnetic resonance imaging data of the two groups were recorded and statistically compared for the following indicators: range of lymphedema involvement (left, right, whole lower limbs, only thigh, only calf and ankle), signs of lymphedema (notable thickening of skin, parallel line sign, grid sign, honeycomb sign, band sign, lymph lake sign, crescent sign, DRS), and lymphedema measurement (skin thickness, band width). The DRS is characterized by notable thickening of the skin plus the grid sign and/or honeycomb sign, plus the band sign.
resultsThe following statistically significant differences in the following indicators were found between the two groups (P < .05): notable skin thickening, parallel line sign, grid sign, honeycomb sign, band sign, DRS, skin thickness, and band width. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy for predicting for DBF with the DRS was 82%, 64%, and 77%, respectively.
conclusionsThis study confirmed good consistency between the DRS and DBF from the perspective of imaging. This tool is suitable for children, adolescents, and patients with contraindications to lymphoscintigraphy. The DRS has important value in assessing the severity of PLEL. The DRS is suggested for the clinical use of combined surgical treatment of PLEL.
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.