Short duration of upper extremity lymphedema correlates with a favorable cytokine response after lymph node transfer surgery.

Vascularized lymph node transfer surgery (VLNT) can provide benefit to lymphedema patients. Cytokines may play a role in the development of lymphedema and in the regeneration of lymphatic vessels after VLNT. Our primary aim was to investigate whether the VLNT patients have a specific cytokine profile. Our secondary aim was to see whether the preoperative lymphedema or severity affects the postoperative cytokine response. Wound exudate was gathered from 18 patients undergoing VLNT on the first and sixth postoperative day (POD). The concentrations of IL-10, TNF-α, TGF-ß1 and VEGF-C were analyzed using enzymelinked immune-sorbent assays. A general score was generated to assess the benefit of the surgery. The changes in cytokine concentrations (1st POD-6th POD) were correlated with the pre- and postoperative lymphedema related factors. A shorter duration of lymphedema preoperatively correlated with an increase in the concentration of IL-10 and TNF-ß during the first six PODs (IL-10: r=0.495, p=0.051; TNF-α: r=0.737, p=0.006) and a decrease in the concentration of TGF-ß1 (r= -0.613, p=0.020). The increase of the concentration of TNF-α during the first six PODs also correlated with a greater total general score (r=0.775, p=0.005) and hence indicated a better response to the surgery. The patients with a shorter duration of lymphedema preoperatively had a more favorable cytokine response during the first six PODs after VLNT.

Risk of donor-site lymphatic vessel dysfunction after microvascular lymph node transfer.

BACKGROUND: Microvascular lymph node transfer has been used to improve lymphatic function in patients with lymphoedema. We previously reported changes in the lymphatic function of the donor limb after lymph node transfer. For this reason, we modified our surgical method to be more conservative. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Microvascular lymph node transfer was performed in 13 patients using the previously reported original method. Sixteen patients were operated upon using the more conservative modified method. Lymphatic function in the donor limb was evaluated using volumetry, lymphoscintigraphy and tissue water percentage. RESULTS: In the original method group, the donor-limb volume was on average greater (199 ± 540 ml) than in the non-operated control limb. The volume difference between the limbs was smaller (151 ± 463 ml) in the modified method group. Two patients in the original method group had abnormal transport index (Ti) values in lymphoscintigraphy indicating decreased lymphatic function of the donor limb. In the modified method group, the Ti-values remained normal. The tissue water percentage of the donor limb was on average 40% ± 4% in the original method group and 40% ± 3% in the modified method group. Importantly, none of the patients in either group developed clinical lymphoedema in the donor limb during the 11-84-month follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Even with the more conservative lymph node transfer method, we can observe slight, subclinical signs of lymphatic dysfunction in the donor limb. These results highlight the importance of minimizing the surgical exploration in the inguinal area and avoiding damage to the lymphatic vessels or sentinel nodes draining the lower limb.