Search

Breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) occurs usually on the affected side, and its cause and pathophysiology are well known. However, the cause of edema of the upper extremity on the unaffected side is barely known. It is often considered to be chemotherapy-induced general edema, and clinical evaluation is rarely performed in these patients. This study aimed to present the clinical characteristics of unilateral breast cancer patients with edema of upper extremity on the unaffected side, and to emphasize the importance of early diagnosis and medical interventions. This study retrospectively analyzed the medical records of unilateral breast cancer patients complaining edema of upper extremity on the unaffected side, from January 2020 to May 2021. Lymphoscintigraphy was used to assist in confirming the diagnosis of lymphedema, and Doppler ultrasonography or 3D computed tomography angiography were performed to differentiate vascular problems. Fourteen patients were enrolled in the study. Seven, 3, and 4 patients had edema of both upper extremities, edema of the upper extremity on the unaffected side only, and edema of all extremities, respectively. None of the 4 patients with edema of all extremities showed abnormal findings on examination. In patients with edema in the upper extremity on the unaffected side alone, lymphatic flow dysfunction was seen in 2 patients, and deep vein thrombosis (DVT) was diagnosed in 1. In patients with edema of both upper extremities, lymphatic flow dysfunction was seen in 2 patients, and DVT was diagnosed in 3. One patient had DVT and accompanying lymphatic flow dysfunction. Lymphedema and DVT were diagnosed in a number of patients with edema of the upper extremity on the unaffected side, and lymphedema can occur without direct injury to the lymphatic flow system. Therefore, clinicians should not overlook the fact that diseases that require early diagnosis and treatment can occur in patients with edema of the unaffected upper extremity., Competing Interests: The authors have no funding and conflicts of interest to disclose., (Copyright © 2024 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.)

The purpose of this study was to investigate lymphoscintigraphy pattern according to the presence or absence of axillary site radiation therapy (aRTx) in breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) patients who underwent sentinel lymph node dissection (SLND). The participants were patients who visited our facility from July 2014 to June 2021 due to upper extremity edema. Among them, patients who underwent SLND after the diagnosis of breast cancer were included. The participants were divided into a group without aRTx (group A) and a group with aRTx (group B). In each patient's lymphoscintigraphy, axillary lymph node uptake (ALNU), lymphatic flow delay, dermal back flow, and the presence of any collateral pathway were checked. Thirty-three patients were enrolled. In all, 27 patients were classified in Group A, and 6 patients were classified in Group B. Between the 2 groups, we found a significant difference (P value < .05) between groups at ALNU and lymphatic flow delay. However, there was no significant difference between groups at the dermal backflow and the presence of a collateral pathway (P value > .05). And 24.2% of patients who developed lymphedema after SLND showed normal lymphoscintigraphy. In this study we suggest that SLND and aRTx affects the activity of the axillary lymph node and ultimately adversely affects lymphatic flow, becoming a risk factor for lymphedema. In addition, regardless of SLND or aRTx, lymphedema may eventually occur in the patient with normal lymphoscintigraphy., Competing Interests: The authors have no funding and conflicts of interest to disclose., (Copyright © 2022 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.)