Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Background: The purpose of this retrospective study was to describe, evaluate, and compare the outcome between end-to-end and side-to-end lymphaticovenous anastomoses for all stages of lymphedema.
Methods: A total of 123 patients were divided into the end-to-end ( n = 63) or the side-to-end ( n = 60) group. The demographics and intraoperative and postoperative findings were evaluated. In addition, subcategory evaluation was performed for early- and advanced-phase lymphedema.
Results: The demographic findings were insignificant. The intraoperative findings showed a significantly higher number of lymphaticovenous anastomoses performed for the end-to-end group (4.1 ± 1.7) over the side-to-end group (3.2 ± 1.2) ( p < 0.001), whereas the number of different lymphatic vessels used per patient was not significant (3.4 ± 1.4 versus 3.2 ± 1.2; p = 0.386). The diameter of the lymphatic vessels was not significant (0.43 ± 0.06 mm versus 0.45 ± 0.09 mm; p = 0.136). Although both groups showed significant postoperative volume reduction, the side-to-end group had a significantly better reduction in all time intervals ( p < 0.03) and longitudinal outcome ( p = 0.004). However, the subcategory evaluation for early-phase patients showed no difference between the two groups, but a significantly better volume reduction ratio was noted for the side-to-end group at all time intervals ( p < 0.025) in addition to overall longitudinal outcome ( p = 0.004) in advanced lymphedema patients.
Conclusions: This is the first study to report the efficacy of end-to-end versus side-to-end lymphaticovenous anastomosis in different phases of lymphedema. Although both end-to-end and side-to-end lymphaticovenous anastomoses are significantly effective in volume reduction, there was a significantly better reduction for the side-to-end group in advanced-phase lymphedema patients with stage II late and stage III disease, whereas no difference was noted for early-phase lymphedema patients.
Clinical Question/level Of Evidence: Therapeutic, III.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0000000000009647 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!