Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39222789›Full record

Trial reportJournal of vascular surgery. Venous and lymphatic disorders2025

Results from a comparative study to evaluate the treatment effectiveness of a nonpneumatic compression device vs an advanced pneumatic compression device for lower extremity lymphedema swelling (TEAYS study).

Michael Barfield, Ron Winokur, Todd Berland, Sandi Davis, Vicky Ralph, Nancy Chatham, Stanley Rockson, Thomas S Maldonado

Erratum issuedAbstract readRandomized Controlled TrialComparative StudyMulticenter Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of vascular surgery. Venous and lymphatic disorders, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Michael BarfieldUniversity Surgical Associates, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Nashville, TN.
Ron WinokurVascular and Interventional Radiology, Weill Cornell Medical Center, New York, NY.
Todd BerlandVascular Surgery, New York University, New York, NY.
Sandi DavisDavis Care Physical Therapy, New York, NY.
Vicky RalphPhysical Medicine and Rehabilitation, University of Colorado, Denver, CO.
Nancy ChathamSt. Johns Regional Wound Clinic, Hospital Sisters Health Center, Springfield, IL.
Stanley RocksonDepartment of Cardiovascular Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, CA.
Thomas S MaldonadoVascular Surgery, New York University, New York, NY. Electronic address: thomas.maldonado@nyulangone.org.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveAdvanced pneumatic compression devices (APCDs) have been shown to be effective in treatment of lower extremity lymphedema in the home setting. However, adherence to self-care has been poor, and APCDs require patients to remain immobile during treatment. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of a novel nonpneumatic compression device (NPCD) for treating lower extremity lymphedema vs an APCD.

methodsA randomized, crossover head-to-head study was performed at nine sites in 2023. Patients were randomized to either the NPCD or a commercially available APCD. Patients used the randomly assigned initial device for 90 days with a 4-week washout period before a comparable 90-day use of the second device.

resultsA total of 71 patients (108 affected limbs) with lower extremity lymphedema were analyzed. Compared with the APCD, the NPCD was associated with a greater mean decrease in limb edema volume (a mean limb volume decrease of 369.9 ± 68.19 mL [P < .05] vs 83.1 ± 67.99 mL [P < .05]). Significant improvement in Quality of Life was achieved for NPCD and but not for APCD treatment (score improvement of 1.01 ± 0.23 [P < .05] for NPCD vs 0.17 ± 0.18 [P > .05] for APCD). Patients reported greater adherence (81% vs 56%; P < .001) and satisfaction with the NPCD (78% vs 22%) compared with APCD. No device-related adverse events were reported.

conclusionsThe novel NPCD is an effective treatment for decreasing limb volume in patients with lower extremity lymphedema. The NPCD was more effective than an APCD and resulted in superior limb volume decrease, greater improved quality of life, adherence, mobility, and patient satisfaction.

Indexed as

Cross-Over StudiesIntermittent Pneumatic Compression DevicesLower ExtremityLymphedemaAdultAgedEquipment DesignFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPatient CompliancePatient SatisfactionQuality of LifeTime FactorsTreatment OutcomeDayspringLower extremity lymphedemaLymphedema treatmentNonpneumatic compressionNPCDPhlebolymphedemaPneumatic compression

Identifiers

PMID39222789
PMCPMC11764854

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.