ReviewJPRAS open2025
Prevalence of lower extremity edema following inguinal lymphadenectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in JPRAS open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Squamous Cell Carcinoma Developing from an Epidermal Inclusion Cyst on the Buttock.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2026Article
- Case Report: Penile malignant melanoma: insights from a three-case series and literature review on diagnosis and management.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Prevalence of lower extremity edema following inguinal lymphadenectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.JPRAS open · 2025Review
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: Lower extremity lymphedema (LEL) can develop because of inguinal lymph node dissection in the treatment of gynecologic, genitourinary, and dermatological malignancies. To optimize patient counseling and patient selection for microsurgical interventions aimed at preventing or treating LEL, its prevalence and associated patient characteristics must be accurately documented. This systematic review and meta-analysis provides a comprehensive overview of literature on the reported prevalence of LEL in patients undergoing inguinal lymphadenectomy. Methods: From Embase, PubMed, and Web of Science databases, 23 studies were identified that met the inclusion criteria. This review was conducted in accordance with the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses guidelines. Risk of bias was assessed using the Risk of Bias in Non-randomized Studies-of Exposure tool. Results: Random-effects meta-analyses of proportions estimated a 24% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 17-31) pooled prevalence of LEL with a high degree of heterogeneity between the studies ( Conclusion: The findings from this study emphasize the importance of considering malignancy etiology when assessing the risk of LEL following inguinal lymphadenectomy. This knowledge could aid physicians in informing patients about the risk of LEL, while also facilitating proper patient selection for microsurgical interventions.
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.