scispace - formally typeset

Journal ArticleDOI

Manual lymphatic drainage therapy in patients with breast cancer related lymphoedema

09 Mar 2011-BMC Cancer (BioMed Central)-Vol. 11, Iss: 1, pp 94-94

TL;DR: The results of this study will provide information on the effectiveness of Manual Lymphatic Drainage and its impact on the quality of life and physical limitations of these patients, as well as the improvement of the concomitant symptomatology.

AbstractBackground Lymphoedema is a common and troublesome condition that develops following breast cancer treatment. The aim of this study is to analyze the effectiveness of Manual Lymphatic Drainage in the treatment of postmastectomy lymphoedema in order to reduce the volume of lymphoedema and evaluate the improvement of the concomitant symptomatology.

Topics: Manual lymphatic drainage (56%), Breast cancer (52%), Lymphedema (51%)

...read more

Content maybe subject to copyright    Report

Citations
More filters

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: To assess the efficacy and safety of MLD in treating breast cancer-related lymphedema, six trials were included and it was found that participants with mild-to-moderate BCRL were better responders to MLD than were moderate- to-severe participants.
Abstract: Background More than one in five patients who undergo treatment for breast cancer will develop breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL). BCRL can occur as a result of breast cancer surgery and/or radiation therapy. BCRL can negatively impact comfort, function, and quality of life (QoL). Manual lymphatic drainage (MLD), a type of hands-on therapy, is frequently used for BCRL and often as part of complex decongestive therapy (CDT). CDT is a fourfold conservative treatment which includes MLD, compression therapy (consisting of compression bandages, compression sleeves, or other types of compression garments), skin care, and lymph-reducing exercises (LREs). Phase 1 of CDT is to reduce swelling; Phase 2 is to maintain the reduced swelling. Objectives To assess the efficacy and safety of MLD in treating BCRL. Search methods We searched Medline, EMBASE, CENTRAL, WHO ICTRP (World Health Organization's International Clinical Trial Registry Platform), and Cochrane Breast Cancer Group's Specialised Register from root to 24May 2013. No language restrictions were applied. Selection criteria We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs of women with BCRL. The intervention was MLD. The primary outcomes were (1) volumetric changes, (2) adverse events. Secondary outcomes were (1) function, (2) subjective sensations, (3) QoL, (4) cost of care. Data collection and analysis We collected data on three volumetric outcomes. (1) LE (lymphedema) volume was defined as the amount of excess fluid left in the arm after treatment, calculated as volume in mL of affected arm post-treatment minus unaffected arm post-treatment. (2) Volume reduction was defined as the amount of fluid reduction in mL from before to after treatment calculated as the pretreatment LE volume of the affected arm minus the post-treatment LE volume of the affected arm. (3) Per cent reduction was defined as the proportion of fluid reduced relative to the baseline excess volume, calculated as volume reduction divided by baseline LE volume multiplied by 100. We entered trial data into ReviewManger 5.2 (RevMan), pooled data using a fixed-effect model, and analyzed continuous data as mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We also explored subgroups to determine whether mild BCRL compared to moderate or severe BCRL, and BCRL less than a year compared to more than a year was associated with a better response to MLD. Main results Six trials were included. Based on similar designs, trials clustered in three categories. (1) MLD + standard physiotherapy versus standard physiotherapy (one trial) showed significant improvements in both groups from baseline but no significant between-groups differences for per cent reduction. (2) MLD + compression bandaging versus compression bandaging (two trials) showed significant per cent reductions of 30% to 38.6% for compression bandaging alone, and an additional 7.11% reduction forMLD (MD7.11%, 95% CI 1.75% to 12.47%; two RCTs; 83 participants). Volume reduction was borderline significant (P = 0.06). LE volume was not significant. Subgroup analyses was significant showing that participants with mild-to-moderate BCRL were better responders to MLD than were moderate-to-severe participants. (3) MLD+ compression therapy versus nonMLDtreatment + compression therapy (three trials) were too varied to pool. One of the trials compared compression sleeve plus MLD to compression sleeve plus pneumatic pump. Volume reduction was statistically significant favoringMLD (MD 47.00 mL, 95% CI 15.25 mL to 78.75 mL; 1 RCT; 24 participants), per cent reduction was borderline significant (P= 0.07), and LE volume was not significant. A second trial compared compression sleeve plus MLD to compression sleeve plus selfadministered simple lymphatic drainage (SLD), and was significant forMLD for LE volume (MD -230.00 mL, 95% CI -450.84 mL to -9.16 mL; 1 RCT; 31 participants) but not for volume reduction or per cent reduction. A third trial of MLD + compression bandaging versus SLD + compression bandaging was not significant (P = 0.10) for per cent reduction, the only outcome measured (MD 11.80%, 95% CI -2.47% to 26.07%, 28 participants). MLD was well tolerated and safe in all trials. Two trials measured function as range of motion with conflicting results. One trial reported significant within-groups gains for both groups, but no between-groups differences. The other trial reported there were no significant within-groups gains and did not report between-groups results. One trial measured strength and reported no significant changes in either group. Two trials measured QoL, but results were not usable because one trial did not report any results, and the other trial did not report between-groups results. Four trials measured sensations such as pain and heaviness. Overall, the sensations were significantly reduced in both groups over baseline, but with no between-groups differences. No trials reported cost of care. Trials were small ranging from 24 to 45 participants. Most trials appeared to randomize participants adequately. However, in four trials the person measuring the swelling knew what treatment the participants were receiving, and this could have biased results. Authors' conclusions MLD is safe and may offer additional benefit to compression bandaging for swelling reduction. Compared to individuals with moderate to-severe BCRL, those with mild-to-moderate BCRL may be the ones who benefit from adding MLD to an intensive course of treatment with compression bandaging. This finding, however, needs to be confirmed by randomized data. In trials where MLD and sleeve were compared with a nonMLD treatment and sleeve, volumetric outcomes were inconsistent within the same trial. Research is needed to identify themost clinically meaningful volumetric measurement, to incorporate newer technologies in LE assessment, and to assess other clinically relevant outcomes such as fibrotic tissue formation. Findings were contradictory for function (range of motion), and inconclusive for quality of life. For symptoms such as pain and heaviness, 60% to 80% of participants reported feeling better regardless of which treatment they received. One-year follow-up suggests that once swelling had been reduced, participants were likely to keep their swelling down if they continued to use a custom-made sleeve. (Less)

162 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The current evidence from RCTs does not support the use of MLD in preventing or treating lymphedema, and clinical and statistical inconsistencies between the various studies confounded the evaluation of the effect ofMLD on breast-cancer-related lyMPhedema.
Abstract: Lymphedema is a common complication of axillary dissection for breast cancer. We investigated whether manual lymphatic drainage (MLD) could prevent or manage limb edema in women after breast-cancer surgery. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to evaluate the effectiveness of MLD in the prevention and treatment of breast-cancer-related lymphedema. The PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro), SCOPUS, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials electronic databases were searched for articles on MLD published before December 2012, with no language restrictions. The primary outcome for prevention was the incidence of postoperative lymphedema. The outcome for management of lymphedema was a reduction in edema volume. In total, 10 RCTs with 566 patients were identified. Two studies evaluating the preventive outcome of MLD found no significant difference in the incidence of lymphedema between the MLD and standard treatment groups, with a risk ratio of 0.63 and a 95% confidence interval (CI) of 0.14 to 2.82. Seven studies assessed the reduction in arm volume, and found no significant difference between the MLD and standard treatment groups, with a weighted mean difference of 75.12 (95% CI, −9.34 to 159.58). The current evidence from RCTs does not support the use of MLD in preventing or treating lymphedema. However, clinical and statistical inconsistencies between the various studies confounded our evaluation of the effect of MLD on breast-cancer-related lymphedema.

129 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The clinical importance of ependymal route-based targeted gene therapy and intranasal drug administration in the brain by taking advantage of the unique role played by brain lymphatic pathways in the regulation of CSF flow and ISF/CSF exchange is highlighted.
Abstract: The belief that the vertebrate brain functions normally without classical lymphatic drainage vessels has been held for many decades. On the contrary, new findings show that functional lymphatic drainage does exist in the brain. The brain lymphatic drainage system is composed of basement membrane-based perivascular pathway, a brain-wide glymphatic pathway, and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) drainage routes including sinus-associated meningeal lymphatic vessels and olfactory/cervical lymphatic routes. The brain lymphatic systems function physiological as a route of drainage for interstitial fluid (ISF) from brain parenchyma to nearby lymph nodes. Brain lymphatic drainage helps maintain water and ion balance of the ISF, waste clearance, and reabsorption of macromolecular solutes. A second physiological function includes communication with the immune system modulating immune surveillance and responses of the brain. These physiological functions are influenced by aging, genetic phenotypes, sleep-wake cycle, and body posture. The impairment and dysfunction of the brain lymphatic system has crucial roles in age-related changes of brain function and the pathogenesis of neurovascular, neurodegenerative, and neuroinflammatory diseases, as well as brain injury and tumors. In this review, we summarize the key component elements (regions, cells, and water transporters) of the brain lymphatic system and their regulators as potential therapeutic targets in the treatment of neurologic diseases and their resulting complications. Finally, we highlight the clinical importance of ependymal route-based targeted gene therapy and intranasal drug administration in the brain by taking advantage of the unique role played by brain lymphatic pathways in the regulation of CSF flow and ISF/CSF exchange.

94 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: There was mild evidence that massage may be a useful intervention in alleviating negative emotions and fatigue in patients with breast cancer, and more trials with longer follow-up are needed to determine the exact long-term efficacy.
Abstract: Massage as a complementary and alternative therapy has been associated with enhancing health and coping with treatment-related side effects in patients with breast cancer worldwide. This systematic review examined whether massage interventions provide any measurable benefit in breast cancer-related symptoms. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were searched for in PubMed, EMBASE.com and the Cochrane Library through June 2013. We evaluated the quality of the studies included by the Cochrane Handbook 5.2 standards and analyzed the data using the Cochrane Collaboration’s RevMan 5.2 software. Eighteen RCTs with a total of 950 participants were included. Compared with the control group, our meta-analysis showed that patients receiving regular use of massage had significantly greater reductions in anger and fatigue symptoms. However, there were no significant differences in depression, anxiety, pain, upper limb lymphedema, cortisol and health-related quality of life. The current evidence demonstrates that there was mild evidence that massage may be a useful intervention in alleviating negative emotions and fatigue in patients with breast cancer. More trials with longer follow-up are needed to determine the exact long-term efficacy of this class of complementary and alternative medicine on breast cancer-related symptoms and quality of life.

45 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The results indicate that parallel (immediate and delayed) results may be obtained by CDT without the use of Vodder MLD and CB may be an essential part of lymphedema management.
Abstract: Context Complex decongestive lymphatic therapy (CDT) has been the method of choice in conservative management of lymphedema. Although effective, it is time consuming and manual lymph drainage (MLD) usually requires skilled therapists. Objectives The purpose of this study was to compare the reduction in edema volume in more advanced (≥20% limb volume difference) postmastectomy arm lymphedema achieved by compression bandaging (CB) and physical exercises vs. the same management augmented by an additional 30 minutes of MLD (Vodder II method). Methods Sixty postmastectomy women were randomly assigned to either the CB group or the CDT group. Of those, 51 women (26 within the CB group) completed 26 weeks of therapy (two weeks of the intensive phase and six months of the maintenance phase). Results A decrease of limb volume (15.6% in the CB group and 13.8% in the CDT group), edema volume (47.2% and 47.4%, respectively), and limb-related volume change (14.7% and 12.5%) during the intensive phase were observed. This improvement remained constant in both groups after six months of maintenance therapy. The health-related quality of life (measured by the Lymphedema Questionnaire) similarly showed improvement in both groups, with a high level of treatment satisfaction. Conclusion These results indicate that parallel (immediate and delayed) results may be obtained by CDT without the use of Vodder MLD and CB may be an essential part of lymphedema management.

42 citations


References
More filters

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Chronic oedema arising for reasons other than cancer treatment is much more prevalent than generally perceived, yet resources for treatment are mainly cancer-based, leading to inequalities of care.
Abstract: Summary Background: Lymphoedema/chronic oedema is an important cause of morbidity in the population, but little is known of its epidemiology and impact on patients or health services. Aim: To determine the magnitude of the problem of chronic oedema in the community, and the likely impact of oedema on use of health resources, employment and patient’s quality of life.

454 citations


"Manual lymphatic drainage therapy i..." refers background in this paper

  • ...Problems associated with lymphoedema include: pain, altered sensations such as discomfort and heaviness, difficulties with physical mobility, physiological distress, recurrent infections and social isolation [3,4]....

    [...]


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Treatment for breast cancer is associated with considerable arm morbidity, which has a negative impact on QOL, andArm morbidity should be carefully monitored in future studies involving local treatment modalities for Breast cancer.
Abstract: PURPOSE: To determine the prevalence of and contributing factors for chronic arm morbidity including lymphedema in breast cancer patients after treatment and to assess the impact of arm morbidity on quality of life (QOL). PATIENTS AND METHODS: A four-question screening questionnaire was developed and mailed to a random sample of 744 breast cancer patients treated curatively in two cancer centers from 1993 to 1997. Patients were without recurrence and at least 2 years from diagnosis. Respondents were classified as with or without arm-related symptoms on the basis of the survey. Stratified random samples from each group were then invited for a detailed assessment of their symptoms and signs, including the presence of lymphedema. Their QOL was assessed by the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QOL Questionnaire C-30 and by a detailed arm problem questionnaire that assessed various aspects of daily arm functioning. RESULTS: Approximately half of all screened patients were symptomatic a...

329 citations


"Manual lymphatic drainage therapy i..." refers background in this paper

  • ...In a study in which 744 patients with breast cancer were assessed with these quality of life scales, some imbalances regarding the quality of life in those patients with lymphoedema were found [ 8 ]....

    [...]


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: HRQOL was lower for BrCa survivors with diagnosed lymphedema and for those with arm symptoms without diagnosed lyMPhedema in the IWHS, according to a dose-response relation between number of arm symptoms and lower HRQOL.
Abstract: Purpose The impact of lymphedema or related arm symptoms on health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in breast cancer (BrCa) survivors has not been examined using a large population-based cohort. Patients and Methods The Iowa Women’s Health Study (IWHS) collected self-report data for lymphedema, arm symptoms, and HRQOL (Medical Outcomes Study Short Form-36) in 2004 and data for cancer diagnosis, treatment, and behavioral and health characteristics between 1986 and 2003. We studied 1,287 women, age 55 to 69 years at baseline, who developed unilateral BrCa. We used cross-sectional analyses to describe the prevalence of lymphedema and arm symptoms and multivariate-adjusted generalized linear models to compare HRQOL (physical functioning, bodily pain, general health, physical and emotional role limitations, vitality, social functioning, and mental health) between the following three survivor groups: women with lymphedema (n 104), women with arm symptoms without diagnosed lymphedema (n 475), and women without lymphedema or arm symptoms (n 708).

301 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: It is suggested that CB on its own should be considered as a primary treatment option in reducing arm lymphedema volume, as well as manual lymph drainage massage in combination with multi-layered compression bandaging.
Abstract: Purpose. The purpose of this investigation was to compare the reduction in arm lymphedema volume achieved from manual lymph drainage massage (MLD) in combination with multi-layered compression bandaging (CB) to that achieved by CB alone.

215 citations


"Manual lymphatic drainage therapy i..." refers background in this paper

  • ...On the other hand, the fact that CPT implies several techniques (manual lymph drainage, skin care and multilayer compression bandaging followed by a compression garment to reduce oedema and therapeutic exercises) makes it difficult to recognize which of them is the truly effective one in the treatment of lymphoedema [ 12-14 ]....

    [...]


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The study showed that both groups obtained a significant reduction in edema and that MLD did not contribute significantly to reduce edema volume.
Abstract: A prospective randomized study was carried out to investigate whether the addition of manual lymphatic drainage (MLD) to the standard therapy could improve treatment outcome in women with lymphedema of the ipsilateral arm after breast cancer treatment. Forty-two patients were randomly assigned to receive standard therapy or standard therapy plus MLD 8 times in 2 weeks and training in self-massage. The standard therapy consisted of use of a compression garment, exercises and information about lymphedema and skin care. The efficacy of treatment was evaluated by reduction in lymphedema volume during treatment and by improvement in symptoms potentially related to lymphedema. The patients were followed-up for a total of 12 months. The study showed that both groups obtained a significant reduction in edema and that MLD did not contribute significantly to reduce edema volume.

208 citations