ReviewMedical oncology (Northwood, London, England)2024
Current diagnostic and quantitative techniques in the field of lymphedema management: a critical review.
Review in Medical oncology (Northwood, London, England), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 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
17 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparing the direct effect of lymphatic dynamic transport after lower-level laser therapy in healthy volunteers: a randomized controlled trial.Lasers in medical science · 2025Trial
- "Debulking" the future of lymphedema surgery: A narrative review.JPRAS open · 2026Review
- Lymphedema imaging and AI: A review of diagnostic modalities, biomarkers, and clinical integration.Biomedical journal · 2026Review
- Remote Monitoring of Bioelectrical Impedance in Patients With Breast Cancer-Related Lymphedema: 1-Year Pilot Longitudinal Study.JMIR biomedical engineering · 2026Article
- Response to comment 'Comment on "The effects of early rehabilitation on physical and psychosocial functions after breast cancer surgery"'.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026Article
- Do not mistake symptomatic improvement for disease modification: therapeutic endpoints in secondary lower-extremity lymphedema require inflammation-fibrosis anchoring.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
- Layer-Specific Assessment of Dermal Thickness and Stiffness Using Shear Wave Elastography in Gynecologic Cancer-Related Lower-Limb Lymphedema: An Exploratory Cross-Sectional Study.International journal of general medicine · 2026Article
- Automated CT segmentation for lower extremity tissues in lymphedema evaluation using deep learning.European radiology · 2025Article
- Advancing Lymphedema Surveillance With Evidence-Based Practices.Clinical journal of oncology nursing · 2025Review
- Mesenchymal stem cell therapy for breast cancer-related secondary lymphedema (Review).Molecular and clinical oncology · 2025Review
- Feasibility and Impact of 6-Month Rowing on Arm Lymphedema, Flexibility, and Fatigue in Breast Cancer Survivors.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025Article
- High-Frequency Ultrasonography Imaging: Anatomical Measuring Site as Potential Clinical Marker for Early Identification of Breast Cancer-Related Lymphedema.Biomedicines · 2025Article
- Imaging and management of lymphedema in the era of precision oncology.The British journal of radiology · 2025Review
- Review
- Lymphovenous anastomosis: microsurgical innovation and clinical outcomes in breast cancer-related lymphedema care.Frontiers in surgery · 2025Review
- Advances in etiology, pathophysiology, diagnosis, and management of lymphedema: a comprehensive review.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Review
- Ultrasound Examination of Skin, Fasciae and Subcutaneous Tissue: Optimizing Rehabilitation for Secondary Upper Limb Lymphedema.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Lymphedema evaluation entails multifaceted considerations for which options continue to evolve and emerge. This paper provides a critical review of the current status of diagnostic and quantitative measures for lymphedema, from traditional and novel bedside assessment tools for volumetric and fluid assessment, to advanced imaging modalities. Modalities are contrasted with regard to empirical support and feasibility of clinical implementation. The manuscript proposes a grid framework for comparing the ability of each modality to quantify specific lymphedema characteristics, including distribution, dysmorphism, tissue composition and fluid content, lymphatic anatomy and function, metaplasia, clinical symptoms, and quality of life and function. This review additionally applies a similar framework approach to consider how well assessment tools support important clinical needs, including: (1) screening, (2) diagnosis and differential diagnosis, (3) individualization of treatment, and (4) monitoring treatment response. The framework highlights which clinical needs are served by an abundance of assessment tools and identifies others that have problematically few. The framework clarifies which tools have greater or lesser empirical support. The framework is designed to assist stakeholders in selecting appropriate diagnostic and surveillance modalities, gauging levels of confidence when applying tools to specific clinical needs, elucidating overarching patterns of diagnostic and quantitative strengths and weaknesses, and informing future investigation.
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.