Trial reportSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2025
The effect of muscles in the treatment of lower limb lymphedema: respiratory muscles or leg muscles?
Trial report in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05609526 (Target Muscles Training in Patients With Leg Lymphedema), which is not on this map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
Target Muscles Training in Patients With Leg Lymphedema : Inspiratory Muscles Versus Calf Muscles
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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
Abstract
purposeThis study aimed to compare the effects of manual lymphatic drainage and bandaging (MLDB) combined with calf muscle exercise training (CMT) and/or inspiratory muscle training (IMT) on edema, muscle strength, functional capacity, functionality, and quality of life (QoL) in patients with secondary lower limb lymphedema (LLL).
methodA total of 76 patients (mean age: 47.06 ± 16.16 years; 84.2% female) with LLL were included in the study and randomized into four groups: MLDB alone (Group 1), MLDB + CMT (Group 2), MLDB + IMT (Group 3), and MLDB + CMT + IMT (Group 4). The training programs were administered for 30 min per day, five days per week, over three weeks. Edema was assessed using circumference measurements (CM) and tissue dielectric constant (TDC). Muscle strength was evaluated using maximum inspiratory/expiratory pressure (MIP/MEP) and a dynamometer. Functional capacity was assessed with the 6-Minute Walk Test (6MWT), functionality with the Lower Extremity Functional Scale (LEFS), and QoL with the Lymphedema Quality of Life Scale (LYMQOL).
resultsIn the intra-group analyses, all assessments improved in all groups, except for MIP, MEP, and gastrocnemius muscle strength in Group 1 and MIP in Group 2 (p < 0.05). In the inter-group analyses, Group 3 showed the largest effect sizes (ES) for reductions in TDC (ES: 2.34) and improvements in LYMQOL (ES: 1.74), MEP (ES: 1.46), and LEFS (ES: 1.44) (p < 0.001 for all). Group 4 had the largest ES for increases in MIP (ES: 1.42, p < 0.001). Group 2 showed the largest ES for improvements in gastrocnemius muscle strength (ES: 1.41, p < 0.001). However, there were no significant differences among the groups in CM or 6MWT results (p > 0.05).
conclusionCompared to enhancing leg muscle strength, improving respiratory muscle function in addition to MLDB had a greater impact on reducing edema and enhancing functionality and QoL. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05609526. Registration Date: 14.11.2022.
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.