SynthesisFrontiers in oncology2025
Outcomes after liposuction-based treatment of lymphedema: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Surgical Intervention for Filariasis-Induced Lymphedema: A Systematic Review of Ablative and Physiological Approaches.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Gatekeeper or Pathfinder? The Evolving Role of Lymphedema Surgeons in the Assessment of Limb Swelling.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Epithelial-mesenchymal transition in cutaneous fibrosis disease: from mechanisms to therapy.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
- Machine learning-based model to predict liposuction outcomes in unilateral breast cancer-related lymphedema.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Integrated surgical treatment: a new model for treating secondary extremity lymphedema based on algorithms.Frontiers in oncology · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Lymphedema, a chronic condition involving lymphatic fluid accumulation, affects over 250 million people worldwide. Liposuction (LS), introduced in 1989, offers a minimally invasive option for non-pitting lymphedema by reducing fibrotic and hypertrophic tissues. However, LS requires ongoing compression therapy as it does not address the underlying lymphatic dysfunction. Although integrated approaches combining LS with lymphovenous anastomosis (LVA) or vascularized lymph node transfer (VLNT) aim to address both fluid removal and lymphatic repair, there remains a lack of consensus regarding the efficacy of these integrated liposuction-based treatments. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis conducted by the PRISMA and AMSTAR guidelines included studies from 1996 to 2024. Fifty-two studies (n=2,334) were reviewed and 23 (n=1,028) were analyzed quantitatively. Outcomes mainly included limb volume reduction, reliance on conservative treatment, improvement in infection rates, and improvement in the quality of life (QOL). Results: LS-based treatments significantly reduce volume in both upper and lower limbs (91.08% and 92.03%). Standalone LS reduced limb volume by 99.74% but relied on continuous compression therapy. Combined approaches achieved slightly lower reductions (87.31%), but significantly decreased compression dependence, improved lymphatic function, and enhanced QOL. Furthermore, LS-based interventions were associated with a potential reduction in infection episodes, thereby providing long-term benefits. Conclusion: Liposuction-based therapies effectively manage lymphedema by reducing limb volume and may reduce infections, while improving QOL. In addition, integrated approaches offer additional benefits by directly addressing lymphatic dysfunction and reducing reliance on compression therapy. Standardized methodologies and long-term studies are needed to refine the clinical guidelines and optimize outcomes. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO, identifier CRD42024616130.
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.