ArticleCureus2024
Trends in Immediate Lymphatic Reconstruction.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Experimental evaluation of dermal lymphatics in preservation of lymphatic function.Breast cancer research : BCR · 2026Article
- Murine hindlimb lymphedema model: optimization and evaluation of radiation.Breast cancer research : BCR · 2025Article
- Article
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 Immediate lymphatic reconstruction (ILR) is emerging as a useful adjunct after axillary lymph node dissection (ALND), leading to a decrease in lymphedema rates from 30 to 3-13% in breast cancer patients. ILR requires coordination between two surgical specialties for oncologic ALND and microsurgical axillary lymphatic anastomosis. This study aimed to assess the trends in the frequency of ILR performed after ALND at our institution. Methods This study involved a retrospective review of breast cancer patients undergoing ALND with and without ILR at our institution (2017-2022). Data on patient demographics, tumor characteristics, and treatments received were gathered and analyzed. Results A total of 316 patients underwent ALND at our institution and 30.7% (97/316) of them received ILR. There was no significant difference in clinical breast cancer stages between patients who underwent ALND with or without ILR (p>0.05). Neoadjuvant chemotherapy was given to 51.1% (112/219) of patients with ALND only compared to 60.8% (59/97) of patients who underwent ALND with ILR (p=0.09). All patients received adjuvant radiation therapy. ILR was performed after ALND in 4.2% (2/47) in 2017, 25.8% (3/58) in 2018, 17.6% (12/68) in 2019, 35% (21/60) in 2020, 56.9% (41/72) in 2021, and 54.5% (6/11) in 2022. When comparing the first year of the ILR program with the last year of the study period, the odds ratio of receiving ILR after ALND was 1.8 (p=0.04). Conclusions The frequency of performing ILR after ALND in breast cancer patients at our institution witnessed a substantial increase during the study period. The implementation of an established ILR program at an institution can increase procedure uptake accompanied by continued growth in utilization.
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.