Journal of surgical oncology · 2025
Benefits of Additional Liposuction in Lymphatic Reconstructive Surgery.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Grünherz Lisanne, Ferrer Nick, Barbon Carlotta, Zurfluh Carmen Elena, Gousopoulos Epameinondas, Uyulmaz Semra, Giovanoli Pietro, Lindenblatt Nicole
Аннотация
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The goal of this study was to examine the benefits of immediate adjunctive liposuction in patients undergoing lymphatic reconstructive surgery with a focus on complications, limb volume, and patient-reported outcome measurements (PROMs).
METHODS: We conducted a single-center prospective study on patients receiving reconstructive lymphatic surgery at the Department of Plastic Surgery and Hand Surgery of the University Hospital Zurich. Besides patients characteristics and operation details, volume measurements and PROMs were assessed pre- and postoperatively.
RESULTS: We included 73 patients with upper extremity lymphedema (UEL) or lower extremity lymphedema (LEL). A total of 41 patients received lymphatic reconstruction only, while in 32 patients, an additional liposuction in case of fat accumulation was performed. Mean percentage volume reduction for all limbs was -10.1% (±10.0%) in UEL and -9.3% (±6.9%) in LEL. Volume reduction in the additional liposuction group was not statistically different from reconstruction only. Although patients with liposuction had a significantly lower hemoglobin postoperatively (p = 0.03), there was no difference in length of rehabilitation. Regardless of the surgical technique, PROMs confirmed improvements in a broad range of different domains.
CONCLUSION: Combining reconstructive lymphatic surgery with immediate liposuction is effective for patients with a significant lymphedema-associated fat accumulation without increasing postoperative complications.
METHODS: We conducted a single-center prospective study on patients receiving reconstructive lymphatic surgery at the Department of Plastic Surgery and Hand Surgery of the University Hospital Zurich. Besides patients characteristics and operation details, volume measurements and PROMs were assessed pre- and postoperatively.
RESULTS: We included 73 patients with upper extremity lymphedema (UEL) or lower extremity lymphedema (LEL). A total of 41 patients received lymphatic reconstruction only, while in 32 patients, an additional liposuction in case of fat accumulation was performed. Mean percentage volume reduction for all limbs was -10.1% (±10.0%) in UEL and -9.3% (±6.9%) in LEL. Volume reduction in the additional liposuction group was not statistically different from reconstruction only. Although patients with liposuction had a significantly lower hemoglobin postoperatively (p = 0.03), there was no difference in length of rehabilitation. Regardless of the surgical technique, PROMs confirmed improvements in a broad range of different domains.
CONCLUSION: Combining reconstructive lymphatic surgery with immediate liposuction is effective for patients with a significant lymphedema-associated fat accumulation without increasing postoperative complications.