ArticleAbdominal radiology (New York)2026
Lymphangiography and lymphatic embolization for post-surgical abdominal leaks.
Article in Abdominal radiology (New York), 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposePostoperative intra-abdominal lymphatic leaks are uncommon but clinically significant complications after major abdominal tumor surgery. Conservative management is the standard first-line approach, but refractory cases may require lymphangiography with or without lymphatic embolization. This study evaluated the feasibility, safety, and clinical outcomes of lymphangiography-based management in a tertiary oncologic referral center.
methodsThis retrospective single-center study included adult patients referred between January 2015 and January 2025 for postoperative intra-abdominal lymphatic leakage refractory to conservative management. Presentations included isolated chylous ascites, chylous ascites with lymphocele, and isolated lymphocele. The primary endpoint was clinical resolution without repeat intervention after the index lymphangiography. A stricter definition, excluding patients requiring therapeutic paracentesis or drain placement before resolution, was assessed as a sensitivity analysis. Secondary endpoints included technical success, safety, and exploratory factors associated with outcome.
resultsTwenty-seven patients underwent 34 lymphangiographic procedures. A lymphatic leak was identified in 23/34 procedures (68%). Embolization was performed in 24/34 procedures (71%) and was technically successful in all cases. Clinical resolution without repeat intervention after the index lymphangiography was achieved in 18/27 patients (67%), while final clinical resolution after one or more lymphangiography-based procedures was achieved in 21/27 (78%). Seven patients required temporary paracentesis or drain placement before recovery, yielding a strict success rate of 14/27 (52%). No procedure-related major complication occurred. High lumbar-aortic leak location was associated with lower clinical resolution in exploratory analysis.
conclusionIn this small, heterogeneous retrospective cohort, lymphangiography with or without embolization appeared feasible and safe for refractory postoperative intra-abdominal lymphatic leaks. Clinical outcomes were sensitive to endpoint definition, and the association between high lumbar-aortic leak location and poorer outcome should be considered hypothesis-generating. Larger prospective multicenter studies are needed to validate these findings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42742713What 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.