Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41753281›Full record

ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2026

Hemodynamic Challenges of Lower Extremity Lymphovenous Anastomosis: A Critical Reappraisal.

Daihun Kang

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Daihun KangDepartment of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Ewha Womans University Seoul Hospital, Seoul 07804, Republic of Korea.ORCID 0000-0003-3517-5532

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Lymphovenous anastomosis (LVA) has become an established microsurgical treatment for lymphedema, yet the hemodynamic basis for its efficacy in the lower extremity has not been rigorously examined. Most assessments of anastomotic function are performed in the supine position, where lymphatic pressure exceeds venous pressure, creating a favorable gradient for drainage. However, adults spend 16-18 h daily in upright postures, during which ankle-level venous pressure rises to 80-100 mmHg while lymphatic pressure increases only modestly. This pressure reversal raises questions about whether lower extremity LVA can function during routine daily activities. Several protective mechanisms have been proposed, including careful recipient venule selection, competent venous valves, and calf muscle pump assistance, yet these safeguards are inherently intermittent rather than continuous. Clinical data reveal progressive anastomotic patency decline over time, with some studies reporting 64% occlusion at two years, a pattern consistent with cumulative hemodynamic injury. Notably, clinical improvement sometimes persists despite declining patency, suggesting that concurrent conservative therapy or selection bias may contribute to observed outcomes. This review critically examines the postural hemodynamics relevant to lower extremity LVA, evaluates proposed protective mechanisms, and argues that the fundamental premise of sustained upright-posture drainage remains untested after three decades of clinical practice.

Indexed as

hemodynamicslower extremitylymphaticovenous anastomosislymphaticovenular anastomosislymphedemalymphovenous anastomosismicrosurgerysupermicrosurgeryvenous pressureVirchow triad

Identifiers

PMID41753281
PMCPMC12942288

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.