ReviewJPRAS open2026
LNVA for treating secondary lymphedema: A systematic review.
Review in JPRAS open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Secondary lymphedema is a frequent long-term complication following cancer treatment. Although several surgical options exist, lymph node-to-vein anastomosis (LNVA) has recently gained renewed attention as a potential treatment for secondary lymphedema. This systematic review aimed to evaluate the current evidence regarding the efficacy of LNVA in the treatment of secondary lymphedema. A literature search was conducted on November 10, 2025, in Embase, MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar. ClinicalTrials.gov and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were also screened for ongoing studies. Studies reporting outcomes after LNVA in patients with secondary lymphedema were included. Two independent reviewers performed study screening and data extraction. Risk of bias was assessed using ROBINS-I and the JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist for Case Series, and the certainty of evidence was evaluated using GRADE. Three studies met the inclusion criteria: two retrospective cohort studies and one case series. Across studies, LNVA was associated with modest reductions in limb circumference and partial symptom relief in some patients. However, all studies demonstrated serious or high risk of bias, and the overall certainty of evidence was rated as very low. Current evidence supporting LNVA for secondary lymphedema is limited and of low methodological quality. Well-designed prospective studies are required to determine the true clinical value of LNVA.
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.