SynthesisMicrosurgery2025
Efficacy of Immediate Lymphatic Reconstruction in Prevention of Breast Cancer-Related Lymphedema: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Microsurgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Efficacy of Immediate Lymphatic Reconstruction in Prevention of Breast Cancer-Related Lymphedema: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Microsurgery · 2025Pooled it
- LYMPHA Technique to Prevent Arm Lymphedema After Breast Cancer Treatment: A Single-Center Study Based on a 15-Year Follow-Up Period.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- Mechanisms and treatments of lymphedema.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundImmediate lymphatic reconstruction (ILR) is a technique in which lymphatics are visualized and lymphovenous bypass is done at the time of axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) to prevent breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL). This meta-analysis estimates the benefit of ILR in preventing lymphedema by incorporating double- and single-arm studies and stratifying by length of follow-up time.
methodsThree databases were queried for studies with primary data on ILR. Both double- and single-armed studies were included, and papers with small sample sizes, overlapping samples, and unreported data were excluded. Treatment effects were calculated with risk ratios and converted to a logarithmic scale. A meta-analysis was performed using the inverse variance method and a random-effects model, with further analysis done by study design and length of follow-up time.
resultsA total of 17 studies were included (9 double-arm and 8 single-arm; n = 2607). The pooled treatment effect of ILR, expressed as log risk ratio (95% CI), was -0.89 (-1.18, -0.60; p < 0.0001). This corresponds to a relative risk of 0.41 (0.31, 0.55) and a number needed to treat of 9. Double- and single-arm studies showed no significant differences in effect sizes. Studies with < 1-year follow-up demonstrated a larger effect size than those with longer follow-up, and the benefits of ILR were no longer significant past 3 years.
conclusionPatients receiving ILR were significantly less likely to develop BCRL than those receiving ALND alone. Further work is needed to examine whether benefits can truly be sustained long-term.
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.