Compliance improvement of compression therapy in patients with lymphedema

Not availabl

Sodium selenite and cancer related lymphedema: Biological and pharmacological effects

AbstractA significant percentage of cancer patients develop secondary lymphedema after surgery or radiotherapy. The preferred treatment of secondary lymphedema is complex physical therapy. Pharmacotherapy, for example with diuretics, has received little attention, because they were not effective and only offered short-term solutions. Sodium selenite showed promise as a cost-effective, nontoxic anti-inflammatory agent. Treatment with sodium selenite lowers reactive oxygen species (ROS) production, causes a spontaneous reduction in lymphedema volume, increases the efficacy of physical therapy for lymphedema, and reduces the incidence of erysipelas infections in patients with chronic lymphedema. Besides biological effects in reducing excessive production of ROS, sodium selenite also displays various pharmacological effects. So far the exact mechanisms of these pharmacological effects are mostly unknown, but probably include inhibition of adhesion protein expression

Selenium Deficiency in Lymphedema and Lipedema—A Retrospective Cross-Sectional Study from a Specialized Clinic

Background: Selenium is a trace element, which is utilized by the human body in selenoproteins. Their main function is to reduce oxidative stress, which plays an important role in lymphedema and lipedema. In addition, selenium deficiency is associated with an impaired immune function. The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of selenium deficiency in these conditions, and if it is associated with disease severity and an associated medical condition such as obesity. Methods: This cross-sectional study is an anonymized, retrospective analysis of clinical data that was routinely recorded in a clinic specialized in lymphology. The data was comprised from 791 patients during 2012–2019, in which the selenium status was determined as part of their treatment. Results: Selenium deficiency proved common in patients with lymphedema, lipedema, and lipo-lymphedema affecting 47.5% of the study population. Selenium levels were significantly lower in patients with obesity-related lymphedema compared to patients with cancer-related lymphedema (96.6 ± 18.0 μg/L vs. 105.1 ± 20.2 μg/L; p < 0.0001). Obesity was a risk factor for selenium deficiency in lymphedema (OR 2.19; 95% CI 1.49 to 3.21), but not in lipedema. Conclusions: In countries with low selenium supply, selenium deficiency is common, especially in lymphedema patients. Therefore, it would be sensible to check the selenium status in lymphedema patients, especially those with obesity, as the infection risk of lymphedema is already increased

Reduction Scrotoplasty in 100 kg Scrotums

Scrotal elephantiasis is a rare form of lymphedema of the scrotum. Its pathophysiology is diverse and often not clear, as there are only a few diagnostic tools available. Primary therapy consists, as usual for lymphedema, of conservative measures. However, due to anatomical and physiological findings, conservative therapy options are not always applicable. Although the only possible therapy in severe cases is the surgical resection, there is a lack in the literature regarding a standardized surgical approach. Surgical treatment of massive scrotal elephantiasis was performed in two patients according to a standardized strategy. After computed tomography and planning the operation, the penis and testicles were first exposed. Then, the reduction of the scrotum was performed, by holding the lateral flaps to the contralateral side and setting the cutoff line to the center. The cranial flap was decreased as in a modified abdominoplasty. After surgical treatment following the standardized approach, both patients showed functionally and esthetically positive results. Scrotal elephantiasis has a huge impact on life quality of the affected patients. With the described combination of intense conservative therapy and a standardized surgical procedure, these challenging patients can be helped

Clinical trials needed to evaluate compression therapy in breast cancer related lymphedema (BCRL). Proposals from an expert group

Aim. A mainstay of lymphedema management involves the use of compression therapy. Compression therapy application is variable at different levels of disease severity Evidence is scant to direct clinicians in best practice regarding compression therapy use. Further, compression clinical trials are fragmented and poorly extrapolable to the greater population. An ideal construct for conducting clinical trials in regards to compression therapy will promote parallel global initiatives based on a standard research agenda. The purpose of this article is to review current evidence in practice regarding compression therapy for BCRL management and based on this evidence, offer an expert consensus recommendation for a research agenda and prescriptive trials. Recommendations herein focus solely on compression interventions. Methods. This document represents the proceedings of a session organized by the International Compression Club (ICC) in June 2009 in Ponzano (Veneto, Italy). The purpose of the meeting was to enable a group of experts to discuss the existing evidence for compression treatment in breast cancer related lymphedema (BCRL) concentrating on areas where randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are lacking. Results. The current body of research suggests efficacy of compression interventions in the treatment and management of lymphedema. However, studies to date have failed to adequately address various forms of compression therapy and their optimal application in BCRL. We offer recommendations for standardized compression research trials for prophylaxis of arm lymphedema and for the management of chronic BCRL. Suggestions are also made regarding; inclusion and exclusion criteria, measurement methodology and additional variables of interest for researchers to capture. Conclusion. This document should inform future research trials in compression therapy and serve as a guide to clinical researchers, industry researchers and lymphologists regarding the strengths, weaknesses and shortcomings of the current literature. By providing this construct for research trials, the authors aim to support evidence-based therapy interventions, promote a cohesive, standardized and informative body of literature to enhance clinical outcomes, improve the quality of future research trials, inform industry innovation and guide policy related to BCRL. [Int Angiol 2010;29:442-53