SynthesisFrontiers in oncology2024
Conservative medical intervention as a complement to CDT for BCRL therapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Synthesis in Frontiers in oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Comparative efficacy of various physical therapies on pain, fatigue, quality of life and functional impairment in breast cancer survivors: a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Pooled it
- Effects of photobiomodulation therapy on upper limb lymphedema secondary to breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Review
- Comprehensive overview of management and risk assessment of breast cancer-related lymphedema: a multidisciplinary approach.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The effect of first-line complex decongestive therapy (CDT) for breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) depending on various factors forces patients to seek additional treatment. Therefore, this meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the effect of different conservative medical interventions as a complement to CDT. This is the first meta-analysis that includes various kinds of conservative treatments as adjunctive therapy to get broader knowledge and improve practical application value, which can provide recommendations to further improve BCRL patients' health status. Methods: RCTs published before 18 December 2023 from PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases were searched. RCTs that compared the effects of conservative medical intervention were included. A random-effects or fixed-effects model was used based on the heterogeneity findings. Study quality was evaluated using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Results: Sixteen RCTs with 690 participants were included, comparing laser therapy, intermittent pneumatic compression (IPC), extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT), electrotherapy, ultrasound, diet or diet in combination with synbiotic supplement, traditional Chinese medicine (TCM), continuous passive motion (CPM), and negative pressure massage treatment (NMPT). The results revealed that conservative medical intervention as complement to CDT had benefits in improving lymphedema in volume/circumference of the upper extremity [SMD = -0.30, 95% CI = (-0.45, -0.15), Conclusion: Combining conservative medical interventions with CDT appears to have a positive effect on certain BCRL symptoms, especially laser therapy and electrotherapy. It showed a better effect on patients under 60 years old, and laser therapy of low to moderate intensity (5-24 mW, 1.5-2 J/cm Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?RecordID=354824, identifier CRD42022354824.
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.