ArticleMicrosurgery2026
Evaluation of the Feasibility, Safety, and Effectiveness of a Tailored Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Protocol for Gastroepiploic Vascularized Lymph Node Transfer in Breast Cancer-Related Upper Extremity Lymphedema: A Preliminary Retrospective Comparative Study.
Article in Microsurgery, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEnhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols are multimodal perioperative pathways designed to reduce surgical stress, accelerate recovery, and improve resource utilization. Although ERAS principles have been increasingly adopted in microsurgery, their application in vascularized lymph node transfer (VLNT), particularly using gastroepiploic flaps, remains poorly defined. The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility, safety, and effectiveness of a tailored ERAS protocol in patients undergoing gastroepiploic VLNT for breast cancer-related upper extremity lymphedema. PATIENTS AND
methodsA retrospective comparative study was conducted in patients with unilateral breast cancer-related upper extremity lymphedema (ISL Stage II-III) undergoing gastroepiploic vascularized lymph node transfer after failure of at least 6 months of conservative treatment. Patients were managed either with a conventional perioperative protocol, including nasogastric tube placement, delayed oral intake, delayed mobilization, opioid-based analgesia, and delayed initiation of complete decongestive therapy (CDT), or with a tailored ERAS-VLNT protocol incorporating early oral intake, early mobilization, opioid-sparing analgesia, avoidance of nasogastric decompression, and CDT initiation from postoperative Day 7. Outcomes included circumferential reduction rate, LYMQOL score, infection rate, flap-related complications, length of hospital stay, and hospitalization costs.
resultsA total of 45 patients were included, with 29 in the ERAS group and 16 in the conventional group. Baseline demographic and clinical characteristics were comparable between groups. The ERAS group demonstrated a significantly shorter hospital stay (2.34 ± 0.48 vs. 5.56 ± 0.51 days, p < 0.001) and lower estimated hospitalization costs (€1400 vs. €3300, p < 0.001). Flap survival was 100% in both groups, with no flap-related complications. Circumferential reduction rate was comparable between groups (44.39% ± 10.20% vs. 47.53% ± 8.26%, p = 0.278), as were LYMQOL scores at 12 months (8.21 ± 0.73 vs. 7.93 ± 0.70, p = 0.236) and infection rates (2.62 ± 0.90 vs. 2.73 ± 0.96 episodes/year, p = 0.71).
conclusionAn ERAS-based protocol tailored to VLNT is feasible and safe, and is associated with improved perioperative recovery and reduced healthcare costs without evidence of compromised surgical or functional outcomes. These findings support the integration of ERAS principles into lymphatic microsurgery and warrant further prospective validation.
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.