Cargando…

Algorithmic approach to the lymphatic leak after vascular reconstruction: a systematic review

BACKGROUND: To date, there are no consensus guidelines for management of lymphatic leak in groin vascular reconstruction patients. The goal of this study is to review the relevant literature to determine alternatives for treatment and to design an evidence-based algorithm to minimize cost and morbid...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Nicksic, Peter John, Condit, Kevin Michael, Nayar, Harry Siva, Michelotti, Brett Foster
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Korean Society of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8342245/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34352953
http://dx.doi.org/10.5999/aps.2020.02075
_version_ 1783734029507362816
author Nicksic, Peter John
Condit, Kevin Michael
Nayar, Harry Siva
Michelotti, Brett Foster
author_facet Nicksic, Peter John
Condit, Kevin Michael
Nayar, Harry Siva
Michelotti, Brett Foster
author_sort Nicksic, Peter John
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: To date, there are no consensus guidelines for management of lymphatic leak in groin vascular reconstruction patients. The goal of this study is to review the relevant literature to determine alternatives for treatment and to design an evidence-based algorithm to minimize cost and morbidity and maximize efficacy. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature was conducted per Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) protocol. Two independent reviewers applied agreed-upon inclusion and exclusion criteria to eligible records. Studies that included patients who underwent groin dissection for oncologic diagnoses and level 5 data were excluded. Interventions were then categorized by efficacy using predetermined criteria. RESULTS: Our search yielded 333 records, of which eight studies were included. In four studies, the success of lymphatic ligation ranged from 75% to 100%, with average days to resolution ranging from 0 to 9. Conservative management in the form of elevation, compression, and bedrest may prolong time to resolution of lymphatic leak (14–24 days) and therefore cost. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of patients should be offered early operative intervention in the form of lymphatic ligation with or without a primary muscle flap. If the patient is not an operative candidate, a trial of conservative management should be attempted before other nonsurgical interventions.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8342245
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Korean Society of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-83422452021-08-12 Algorithmic approach to the lymphatic leak after vascular reconstruction: a systematic review Nicksic, Peter John Condit, Kevin Michael Nayar, Harry Siva Michelotti, Brett Foster Arch Plast Surg Extremity/Lymphedema BACKGROUND: To date, there are no consensus guidelines for management of lymphatic leak in groin vascular reconstruction patients. The goal of this study is to review the relevant literature to determine alternatives for treatment and to design an evidence-based algorithm to minimize cost and morbidity and maximize efficacy. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature was conducted per Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) protocol. Two independent reviewers applied agreed-upon inclusion and exclusion criteria to eligible records. Studies that included patients who underwent groin dissection for oncologic diagnoses and level 5 data were excluded. Interventions were then categorized by efficacy using predetermined criteria. RESULTS: Our search yielded 333 records, of which eight studies were included. In four studies, the success of lymphatic ligation ranged from 75% to 100%, with average days to resolution ranging from 0 to 9. Conservative management in the form of elevation, compression, and bedrest may prolong time to resolution of lymphatic leak (14–24 days) and therefore cost. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of patients should be offered early operative intervention in the form of lymphatic ligation with or without a primary muscle flap. If the patient is not an operative candidate, a trial of conservative management should be attempted before other nonsurgical interventions. Korean Society of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons 2021-07 2021-07-15 /pmc/articles/PMC8342245/ /pubmed/34352953 http://dx.doi.org/10.5999/aps.2020.02075 Text en Copyright © 2021 The Korean Society of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) ) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Extremity/Lymphedema
Nicksic, Peter John
Condit, Kevin Michael
Nayar, Harry Siva
Michelotti, Brett Foster
Algorithmic approach to the lymphatic leak after vascular reconstruction: a systematic review
title Algorithmic approach to the lymphatic leak after vascular reconstruction: a systematic review
title_full Algorithmic approach to the lymphatic leak after vascular reconstruction: a systematic review
title_fullStr Algorithmic approach to the lymphatic leak after vascular reconstruction: a systematic review
title_full_unstemmed Algorithmic approach to the lymphatic leak after vascular reconstruction: a systematic review
title_short Algorithmic approach to the lymphatic leak after vascular reconstruction: a systematic review
title_sort algorithmic approach to the lymphatic leak after vascular reconstruction: a systematic review
topic Extremity/Lymphedema
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8342245/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34352953
http://dx.doi.org/10.5999/aps.2020.02075
work_keys_str_mv AT nicksicpeterjohn algorithmicapproachtothelymphaticleakaftervascularreconstructionasystematicreview
AT conditkevinmichael algorithmicapproachtothelymphaticleakaftervascularreconstructionasystematicreview
AT nayarharrysiva algorithmicapproachtothelymphaticleakaftervascularreconstructionasystematicreview
AT michelottibrettfoster algorithmicapproachtothelymphaticleakaftervascularreconstructionasystematicreview