nach oben

Erschienen in:

09.09.2021 | Breast Oncology

Diagnostic Criteria for Breast Cancer-Related Lymphedema of the Upper Extremity: The Need for Universal Agreement

verfasst von: Yara W. Kassamani, BS, MS, Cheryl L. Brunelle, BScPT, MPT, Tessa C. Gillespie, BS, Madison C. Bernstein, BA, Loryn K. Bucci, BS, Tracy Nassif, MD, Alphonse G. Taghian, MD, PhD

Erschienen in: Annals of Surgical Oncology | Ausgabe 2/2022

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

With advances in breast cancer treatments and resultant increased survival rates, emphasis has been placed on post-treatment complications such as breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL), a chronic, negative sequela of breast cancer treatment. Accurate BCRL diagnosis necessitates longitudinal screening beginning at preoperative baseline. Prospective screening programs incorporating symptoms, objective measurements and clinical examination allow for early detection, early intervention, and improved BCRL prognosis. Currently, varied diagnostic criteria for BCRL exist, and this lack of consensus leads to variation in diagnostic and screening practices across institutions. This review outlines current diagnostic tools, including subjective and objective measurement methods and clinical examination. The merits of different criteria are evaluated and recommendations are made regarding measurement tools and diagnostic criteria for BCRL. Ultimately, the BCRL diagnostic process should be universalized and combine objective measurements, clinical evaluation, and symptoms assessment, and adhere to the best practices of the measurement tools used.

Whelan TJ, Olivotto IA, Parulekar WR, et al. Regional nodal irradiation in early-stage breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2015;373(4):307–16. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1415340.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Poortmans PM, Collette S, Kirkove C, et al. Internal mammary and medial supraclavicular irradiation in breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2015;373(4):317–27. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1415369.CrossRefPubMed

Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program NCI. Cancer Stat Facts: Female Breast Cancer. https://seer.cancer.gov/statfacts/html/breast.html. Accessed 22 Dec 2020.

DiSipio T, Rye S, Newman B, Hayes S. Incidence of unilateral arm lymphoedema after breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Oncol. 2013;14(6):500–15.CrossRef

Rockson SG. Lymphedema after breast cancer treatment. N Engl J Med. 2018;379(20):1937–44. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMcp1803290.CrossRefPubMed

Foldi E, Foldi M. Foldi’s Textbook of Lymphology. Munich: Urban & Fischer; 2006.

Armer JM. The problem of post-breast cancer lymphedema: impact and measurement issues. Cancer Investig. 2005;23(1):76–83.CrossRef

Fu MR. Breast cancer-related lymphedema: symptoms, diagnosis, risk reduction, and management. World J Clin Oncol. 2014;5(3):241–7. https://doi.org/10.5306/wjco.v5.i3.241.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Ridner SH, Bonner CM, Deng J, Sinclair VG. Voices from the shadows: living with lymphedema. Cancer Nurs. 2012;35(1):1–16. https://doi.org/10.1097/NCC.0b013e31821404c0.CrossRef

10.

O’Toole J, Jammallo LS, Skolny MN, et al. Lymphedema following treatment for breast cancer: a new approach to an old problem. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2013;88(2):437–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.critrevonc.2013.05.001.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

11.

Boughey JC, Hoskin TL, Cheville AL, et al. Risk factors associated with breast lymphedema. Ann Surg Oncol. 2014;21(4):1202–8. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-013-3408-5.CrossRefPubMed

12.

Douglass J, Kelly-Hope L. Comparison of staging systems to assess lymphedema caused by cancer therapies, lymphatic filariasis, and podoconiosis. Lymphat Res Biol. 2019;17(5):550–6. https://doi.org/10.1089/lrb.2018.0063.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

13.

World Health Organization. Lymphatic pathology and immunopathology in filariasis. Report of the twelfth meeting in filariasis. Geneva; 1985. doi:TDR/FIL-SWG(12)/85.3.

14.

World Health Organization. Informal Consultation on Evaluation of Morbidity in Lymphatic Filariasis, Tuberculosis Research Centre, Madras. Geneva; 1992. doi:TDR/FIL/MAD/92.3.

15.

Lymphoedema Framework. Best Practice for the Management of Lymphoedema. London: MEP Ltd, 2006; 2006. https://www.lympho.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/Best_practice.pdf.

16.

International Society of Lymphology. The diagnosis and treatment of peripheral lymphedema: 2016 consensus document of the International Society of Lymphology. Lymphology. 2016;49:170–84. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4704591.CrossRef

17.

Tsai RJ, Dennis LK, Lynch CF, Snetselaar LG, Zamba GKD, Scott-conner C. The risk of developing arm lymphedema among breast cancer survivors: a meta-analysis of treatment factors. Ann Surg Oncol. 2009;16(7):1959–72. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-009-0452-2.CrossRefPubMed

18.

Shah C, Vicini FA. Breast cancer-related arm lymphedema: Incidence rates, diagnostic techniques, optimal management and risk reduction strategies. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2011;81(4):907–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2011.05.043.CrossRefPubMed

19.

Donker M, van Tlenhoven G, Straver M, et al. Radiotherapy or surgery of the axilla after a positive sentinel node in breast cancer (EORTC 10981–22023 AMAROS): a randomised, multicentre, open-label, phase 3 non-inferiority trial. Lancet Oncol. 2015;15(12):1303–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(14)70460-7.Radiotherapy.CrossRef

20.

Giuliano AE, Hunt KK, Ballman KV, et al. Effect of axillary dissection vs no axillary dissection on 10-year overall survival among women with invasive breast cancer and sentinel node metastasis: the ACOSOG Z0011 (Alliance) randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2011;305(6):569–75.CrossRef

21.

Kilbreath SL, Refshauge KM, Beith JM, et al. Risk factors for lymphoedema in women with breast cancer: a large prospective cohort. Breast. 2016;28:29–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.breast.2016.04.011.CrossRefPubMed

22.

McLaughlin SA, Wright MJ, Morris KT, et al. Prevalence of lymphedema in women with breast cancer 5 years after sentinel lymph node biopsy or axillary dissection: objective measurements. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26(32):5213–9. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2008.16.3725.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

23.

Jammallo LS, Miller CL, Singer M, et al. Impact of body mass index and weight fluctuation on lymphedema risk in patients treated for breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2013;142(1):59–67. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-013-2715-7.CrossRefPubMed

24.

Ferguson CM, Swaroop MN, Horick N, et al. Impact of ipsilateral blood draws, injections, blood pressure measurements, and air travel on the risk of lymphedema for patients treated for breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2016;34(7):691–8. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2015.61.5948.CrossRefPubMed

25.

Asdourian MS, Swaroop MN, Sayegh HE, et al. Association Between precautionary behaviors and breast cancer-related lymphedema in patients undergoing bilateral surgery. J Clin Oncol. 2017;35(35):3934–41. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2017.73.7494.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

26.

Norman SA, Localio AR, Potashnik SL, et al. Lymphedema in breast cancer survivors: incidence, degree, time course, treatment, and symptoms. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27(3):390–7. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2008.17.9291.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

27.

Mcduff SGR, Mina AI, Brunelle CL, et al. Clinical investigation timing of lymphedema after treatment for breast cancer: when are patients most at risk? Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2019;103(1):62–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2018.08.036.CrossRefPubMed

28.

O’Toole J, Jammallo LS, Miller CL, Skolny MN, Specht MC, Taghian AG. Screening for breast cancer-related lymphedema: The need for standardization. Oncologist. 2013;18(4):350–2. https://doi.org/10.1634/theoncologist.2012-0387.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

29.

Hayes S, Janda M, Cornish B, Battistutta D, Newman B. Lymphedema secondary to breast cancer: how choice of measure influences diagnosis, prevalence, and identifiable risk factors. Lymphology. 2008;41(1):8–28.

30.

Brunelle C, Skolny M, Ferguson C, Swaroop M, O’Toole J, Taghian AG. Establishing and sustaining a prospective screening program for breast cancer-related lymphedema at the Massachusetts General Hospital: Lessons Learned. J Pers Med. 2015;5(2):153–64. https://doi.org/10.3390/jpm5020153.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

31.

Ridner SH. Quality of life and a symptom cluster associated with breast cancer treatment-related lymphedema. Support Care Cancer. 2005;13(11):904–11. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-005-0810-y.CrossRefPubMed

32.

Kosir MA, Rymal C, Koppolu P, et al. Surgical outcomes after breast cancer surgery: measuring acute lymphedema. J Surg Res. 2001;95(2):147–51. https://doi.org/10.1006/jsre.2000.6021.CrossRefPubMed

33.

Armer JM, Radina ME, Porock D, Culbertson SD. Predicting breast cancer-related lymphedema using self-reported symptoms. Nurs Res. 2003;52(6):370–9. https://doi.org/10.1097/00006199-200311000-00004.CrossRefPubMed

34.

Brunelle CL, Roberts SA, Horick NK, et al. Integrating symptoms into the diagnostic criteria for breast cancer-related lymphedema: applying results from a prospective surveillance program. Phys Ther. 2020;100(12):2186–97. https://doi.org/10.1093/ptj/pzaa162.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

35.

Fu MR, Axelrod D, Guth AA, et al. mHealth self-care interventions: Managing symptoms following breast cancer treatment. J Res. 2016;2:28. https://doi.org/10.21037/mhealth.2016.07.03.CrossRef

36.

Weiss J, Daniel T. Validation of the lymphedema life impact scale (LLIS): a condition-specific measurement tool for persons with lymphedema. Lymphology. 2015;48(3):128–38.PubMed

37.

Bulley C, Coutts F, Blyth C, et al. Screening for morbidity following breast cancer. J Lymphoedema. 2012;7(1):18–23.

38.

Pappalardo M, Cheng M. Lymphoscintigraphy for the diagnosis of extremity lymphedema: current controversies regarding protocol, interpretation, and clinical application. J Surg Oncol. 2019;121(1):37–47. https://doi.org/10.1002/jso.25526.CrossRefPubMed

39.

Hassanein AH, MacLellan RA, Grant FD, Greene AK. Diagnostic accuracy of lymphoscintigraphy for lymphedema and analysis of false-negative tests. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2017;5(7):2–5. https://doi.org/10.1097/GOX.0000000000001396.CrossRef

40.

Szuba A, Shin WS, Strauss HW, Rockson S. The third circulation: Radionuclide lymphoscintigraphy in the evaluation of lymphedema. J Nucl Med. 2003;44(1):43–57.PubMed

41.

Toyserkani NM, Hvidsten S, Tabatabaeifar S, Simonsen JA, Høilund-Carlsen PF, Sørensen JA. Tc-99m-human serum albumin transit time as a measure of arm breast cancer-related lymphedema. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2017;5(6):1–5. https://doi.org/10.1097/GOX.0000000000001362.CrossRef

42.

Mihara M, Hara H, Araki J, et al. Indocyanine Green (ICG) lymphography is superior to lymphoscintigraphy for diagnostic imaging of early lymphedema of the upper limbs. PLoS ONE. 2012;7(6):e38182. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0038182.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

43.

Akita S, Mitsukawa N, Kazama T, et al. Comparison of lymphoscintigraphy and indocyanine green lymphography for the diagnosis of extremity lymphoedema. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2013;66(6):792–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjps.2013.02.023.CrossRefPubMed

44.

Yamamoto T, Yamamoto N, Doi K, et al. Indocyanine green-enhanced lymphography for upper extremity lymphedema: A novel severity staging system using dermal backflow patterns. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011;128(4):941–947. https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0b013e3182268cd9

45.

Sander AP, Hajer NM, Hemenway K, Miller AC. Upper-extremity volume measurements in women with lymphedema: a comparison of measurements obtained via water displacement with geometrically determined volume. Phys Ther. 2002;82(12):1201–12.CrossRef

46.

Armer JM, Stewart BR. A comparison of four diagnostic criteria for lymphedema in a post-breast cancer population. Lymphat Res Biol. 2005;3(4):208–17. https://doi.org/10.1089/lrb.2005.3.208.CrossRefPubMed

47.

Smoot BJ, Wong JF, Dodd MJ. Comparison of diagnostic accuracy of clinical measures of breast cancer related lymphedema: Area under the curve. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2011;92(4):603–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2010.11.017.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

48.

Limb Volumes Professional. http://www.clinsoft.org/. Accessed 01 Sept 2021.

49.

Tidhar D, Armer JM, Deutscher D, Shyu CR, Azuri J, Madsen R. Measurement issues in anthropometric measures of limb volume change in persons at risk for and living with lymphedema: A reliability study. J Pers Med. 2015;5(4):341–53. https://doi.org/10.3390/jpm5040341.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

50.

Armer JM, Ballman KV, McCall L, et al. Lymphedema symptoms and limb measurement changes in breast cancer survivors treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy and axillary dissection: results of American College of Surgeons Oncology Group (ACOSOG) Z1071 (Alliance) substudy. Support Care Cancer. 2019;27(2):495–503. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-018-4334-7.CrossRefPubMed

51.

Lee M-J, Boland RA, Czerniec S, Kilbreath SL. Reliability and concurrent validity of the perometer for measuring hand volume in women with and without lymphedema. Lymphat Res Biol. 2011;9(1):13–8. https://doi.org/10.1089/lrb.2010.0021.CrossRefPubMed

52.

Stanton AW, Northfield JW, Holroyd B, Mortimer PS, Levick JR. Validation of an optoelectronic limb volumeter (Perometer). Lymphology. 1997;30(2):77–97.PubMed

53.

Stout NL, Binkley JM, Schmitz KH, et al. A prospective surveillance model for rehabilitation for women with breast cancer. Cancer. 2012;118(SUPPL.8):2191-2200. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.27476

54.

Hidding JT, Viehoff PB, Beurskens CHG, van Laarhoven HWM, Nijhuis-van der Sanden MWG, van der Wees PJ. Measurement properties of instruments for measuring of lymphedema: systematic review. Phys Ther. 2016;96(12):1965–1981. https://doi.org/10.2522/ptj.20150412

55.

Stout NLN, Pfalzer LLA, Springer B, et al. Breast cancer-related lymphedema: comparing direct costs of a prospective surveillance model and a traditional model of care. Phys Ther. 2012;92(1):152–63. https://doi.org/10.2522/ptj.20100167.CrossRefPubMed

56.

Ward LC, Bunce IH, Cornish BH, Mirolo BR, Thomas BJ, Jones LC. MuIti-frequency bioelectrical impedance augments the diagnosis and management of lymphoedema in post-mastectomy patients. Eur J Clin Investig. 1992;22(11):751–4. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2362.1992.tb01440.x.CrossRef

57.

Seward C, Skolny M, Brunelle C, Asdourian M, Salama L, Taghian AG. A comprehensive review of bioimpedance spectroscopy as a diagnostic tool for the detection and measurement of breast cancer-related lymphedema. J Surg Oncol. 2016;114(5):537–42. https://doi.org/10.1002/jso.24365.CrossRefPubMed

58.

Shah C, Vicini FA, Arthur D. Bioimpedance spectroscopy for breast cancer related lymphedema assessment: clinical practice guidelines. Breast J. 2016;22(6):645–50. https://doi.org/10.1111/tbj.12647.CrossRefPubMed

59.

Ridner SH, Dietrich MS, Spotanski K, et al. A prospective study of L-Dex values in breast cancer patients pretreatment and through 12 months postoperatively. Lymphat Res Biol. 2018;16(5):435–41. https://doi.org/10.1089/lrb.2017.0070.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

60.

Fu MR, Cleland CM, Guth AA, et al. L-Dex ratio in detecting breast cancer-related lymphedema: reliability, sensitivity, and specificity. Lymphology. 2013;46(2):85–96.PubMedPubMedCentral

61.

Qin ES, Bowen MJ, Chen WF. Diagnostic accuracy of bioimpedance spectroscopy in patients with lymphedema: A retrospective cohort analysis. J Plast Reconstr Aesthetic Surg. 71(7):1041–1050. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjps.2018.02.012

62.

Barrio AV, Eaton A, Frazier TG. A prospective validation study of bioimpedance with volume displacement in early-stage breast cancer patients at risk for lymphedema. Ann Surg Oncol. 2015;22:370–5. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-015-4683-0.CrossRefPubMedCentral

63.

Bundred NJ, Stockton C, Keeley V, et al. Comparison of multi-frequency bioimpedance with perometry for the early detection and intervention of lymphoedema after axillary node clearance for breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2015;151(1):121–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-015-3357-8.CrossRefPubMed

64.

Bundred N, Foden P, Todd C, et al. Increases in arm volume predict lymphoedema and quality of life deficits after axillary surgery: a prospective cohort study. Br J Cancer. 2020;123:17–25. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41416-020-0844-4.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

65.

Brunelle CL, Taghian AG. Lymphoedema screening: setting the standard. Br J Cancer. 2020;123:1–2. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41416-020-0848-0.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

66.

Mayrovitz HN, Davey S, Shapiro E. Localized tissue water changes accompanying one manual lymphatic drainage (MLD) therapy session assessed by changes in tissue dielectric constant in patients with lower extremity lymphedema. Lymphology. 2008;41:87–92.PubMed

67.

Bakar Y, Tuǧral A, Üyetürk Ü. Measurement of local tissue water in patients with breast cancer-related lymphedema. Lymphat Res Biol. 2018;16(2):160–4. https://doi.org/10.1089/lrb.2016.0054.CrossRefPubMed

68.

Ancukiewicz M, Russell TA, Otoole J, et al. Standardized method for quantification of developing lymphedema in patients treated for breast cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2011;79(5):1436–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2010.01.001.CrossRefPubMed

69.

ImpediMed. SOZO ® Measurement Guide. 2019:5-6. http://impedimed.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/LBL-504-US-Rev-D-SOZO-Measurement-Guide.pdf. Accessed 01 Sept 2021.

70.

Delfin Technologies. Multiprobe MoistureMeterD - Delfintech. https://delfintech.com/products/moisturemeterd/. Accessed 22 Dec 2020.

71.

Ancukiewicz M, Miller CL, Skolny MN, et al. Comparison of relative versus absolute arm size change as criteria for quantifying breast cancer-related lymphedema: the flaws in current studies and need for universal methodology. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2012;135(1):145–52. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-012-2111-8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

72.

Sun F, Skolny MN, Swaroop MN, et al. The need for preoperative baseline arm measurement to accurately quantify breast cancer-related lymphedema. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2016;157(2):229–40. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-016-3821-0.CrossRefPubMed

73.

McLaughlin SA, Staley AC, Vicini F, et al. Considerations for clinicians in the diagnosis, prevention, and treatment of breast cancer-related lymphedema: recommendations from a multidisciplinary expert ASBrS panel: part 1: definitions, assessments, education, and future directions. Ann Surg Oncol. 2017;24(10):2818–26. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-017-5982-4.CrossRefPubMed

74.

Paskett ED, Khakpour N, Moore HC, O’Connor T. NCCN Guidelines Version 2.2020: Survivorship: Lymphedema; 2020.

75.

National Lymphedema Network Medical Advisory Committee. Position statement of the national lymphedema network: screening and early detection of breast cancer-related lymphedema: The Imperative; 2011. https://lymphnet.org/position-papers. Accessed 01 Sept 2021.

76.

Miller CL, Specht MC, Horick N, et al. A novel, validated method to quantify breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) following bilateral breast surgery. Lymphology. 2013;46(2):64–74.PubMed

77.

Spinelli B, Kallan MJ, Zhang X, et al. Intra- and interrater reliability and concurrent validity of a new tool for assessment of breast cancer-related lymphedema of the upper extremity. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2019;100(2):315–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2018.08.185.CrossRefPubMed

78.

Russo S, Walker JL, Carlson JW, et al. Standardization of lower extremity quantitative lymphedema measurements and associated patient-reported outcomes in gynecologic cancers. Gynecol Oncol. 2021;160(2):625–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygyno.2020.10.026.CrossRefPubMed

Titel: Diagnostic Criteria for Breast Cancer-Related Lymphedema of the Upper Extremity: The Need for Universal Agreement
verfasst von: Yara W. Kassamani, BS, MS
Cheryl L. Brunelle, BScPT, MPT
Tessa C. Gillespie, BS
Madison C. Bernstein, BA
Loryn K. Bucci, BS
Tracy Nassif, MD
Alphonse G. Taghian, MD, PhD
Publikationsdatum: 09.09.2021
Verlag: Springer International Publishing
Erschienen in: Annals of Surgical Oncology / Ausgabe 2/2022
Print ISSN: 1068-9265
Elektronische ISSN: 1534-4681
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-021-10645-3

Neu im Fachgebiet Chirurgie

Häusliche Gewalt in der orthopädischen Notaufnahme oft nicht erkannt

28.05.2024 Häusliche Gewalt Nachrichten

In der Notaufnahme wird die Chance, Opfer von häuslicher Gewalt zu identifizieren, von Orthopäden und Orthopädinnen offenbar zu wenig genutzt. Darauf deuten die Ergebnisse einer Fragebogenstudie an der Sahlgrenska-Universität in Schweden hin.

Fehlerkultur in der Medizin – Offenheit zählt!

28.05.2024 Fehlerkultur Podcast

Darüber reden und aus Fehlern lernen, sollte das Motto in der Medizin lauten. Und zwar nicht nur im Sinne der Patientensicherheit. Eine negative Fehlerkultur kann auch die Behandelnden ernsthaft krank machen, warnt Prof. Dr. Reinhard Strametz. Ein Plädoyer und ein Leitfaden für den offenen Umgang mit kritischen Ereignissen in Medizin und Pflege.

Mehr Frauen im OP – weniger postoperative Komplikationen

21.05.2024 Allgemeine Chirurgie Nachrichten

Ein Frauenanteil von mindestens einem Drittel im ärztlichen Op.-Team war in einer großen retrospektiven Studie aus Kanada mit einer signifikanten Reduktion der postoperativen Morbidität assoziiert.

TAVI versus Klappenchirurgie: Neue Vergleichsstudie sorgt für Erstaunen

21.05.2024 TAVI Nachrichten

Bei schwerer Aortenstenose und obstruktiver KHK empfehlen die Leitlinien derzeit eine chirurgische Kombi-Behandlung aus Klappenersatz plus Bypass-OP. Diese Empfehlung wird allerdings jetzt durch eine aktuelle Studie infrage gestellt – mit überraschender Deutlichkeit.

Update Chirurgie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

Newsletter bestellen

Aktuelle BDC Leitlinien-Webinare

S3-Leitlinie „Diagnostik und Therapie des Karpaltunnelsyndroms“

Karpaltunnelsyndrom BDC Leitlinien Webinare

CME: 2 Punkte

Das Karpaltunnelsyndrom ist die häufigste Kompressionsneuropathie peripherer Nerven. Obwohl die Anamnese mit dem nächtlichen Einschlafen der Hand (Brachialgia parästhetica nocturna) sehr typisch ist, ist eine klinisch-neurologische Untersuchung und Elektroneurografie in manchen Fällen auch eine Neurosonografie erforderlich. Im Anfangsstadium sind konservative Maßnahmen (Handgelenksschiene, Ergotherapie) empfehlenswert. Bei nicht Ansprechen der konservativen Therapie oder Auftreten von neurologischen Ausfällen ist eine Dekompression des N. medianus am Karpaltunnel indiziert.

Prof. Dr. med. Gregor Antoniadis

S2e-Leitlinie „Distale Radiusfraktur“

Radiusfraktur BDC Leitlinien Webinare

CME: 2 Punkte

Das Webinar beschäftigt sich mit Fragen und Antworten zu Diagnostik und Klassifikation sowie Möglichkeiten des Ausschlusses von Zusatzverletzungen. Die Referenten erläutern, welche Frakturen konservativ behandelt werden können und wie. Das Webinar beantwortet die Frage nach aktuellen operativen Therapiekonzepten: Welcher Zugang, welches Osteosynthesematerial? Auf was muss bei der Nachbehandlung der distalen Radiusfraktur geachtet werden?

PD Dr. med. Oliver Pieske

Dr. med. Benjamin Meyknecht

S1-Leitlinie „Empfehlungen zur Therapie der akuten Appendizitis bei Erwachsenen“

Appendizitis BDC Leitlinien Webinare

CME: 2 Punkte

Inhalte des Webinars zur S1-Leitlinie „Empfehlungen zur Therapie der akuten Appendizitis bei Erwachsenen“ sind die Darstellung des Projektes und des Erstellungswegs zur S1-Leitlinie, die Erläuterung der klinischen Relevanz der Klassifikation EAES 2015, die wissenschaftliche Begründung der wichtigsten Empfehlungen und die Darstellung stadiengerechter Therapieoptionen.

Dr. med. Mihailo Andric

Live-Webinar "Urologie und Sexualmedizin in der Praxis"

Springer Medizin

Diagnostic Criteria for Breast Cancer-Related Lymphedema of the Upper Extremity: The Need for Universal Agreement

Abstract

Neu im Fachgebiet Chirurgie

Häusliche Gewalt in der orthopädischen Notaufnahme oft nicht erkannt

Fehlerkultur in der Medizin – Offenheit zählt!

Mehr Frauen im OP – weniger postoperative Komplikationen

TAVI versus Klappenchirurgie: Neue Vergleichsstudie sorgt für Erstaunen

Update Chirurgie

Aktuelle BDC Leitlinien-Webinare

S3-Leitlinie „Diagnostik und Therapie des Karpaltunnelsyndroms“

S2e-Leitlinie „Distale Radiusfraktur“

S1-Leitlinie „Empfehlungen zur Therapie der akuten Appendizitis bei Erwachsenen“

Live-Webinar "Urologie und Sexualmedizin in der Praxis"

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 2/2022

Clinical Outcomes of Taiwanese Patients with Resected Oral Cavity Squamous Cell Carcinoma Who Underwent Reconstruction with Free Versus Local Flaps

Vacuum-Assisted Breast Biopsy After Neoadjuvant Systemic Treatment for Reliable Exclusion of Residual Cancer in Breast Cancer Patients

Talimogene Laherparepvec (T-VEC) for the Treatment of Advanced Locoregional Melanoma After Failure of Immunotherapy: An International Multi-Institutional Experience

Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy versus Skin-Sparing Mastectomy: Does Saving the Nipple Impact Short- and Long-Term Patient Satisfaction?

Impact of Bile Duct Tumor Thrombus on the Long-Term Surgical Outcomes of Hepatocellular Carcinoma Patients: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis

ASO Author Reflections: T-VEC as Salvage for Progression of Locoregionally Metastatic Melanoma After Failure of Immunotherapy

Update Chirurgie