Digital Volumetric Measurements Based on 3D Scans of the Lower Limb: A Valid and Reproducible Method for Evaluation in Lymphedema Therapy.

BACKGROUND: Exact quantification of volumetric changes of the extremities is difficult and often error-prone. The aim of this study was to establish a standardized method based on 3-dimensional (3D) scans. Furthermore, this study tests the method in terms of reproducibility and evaluates volume changes after surgical therapy in patients suffering from lymphedema on the lower extremity. METHODS: 3D scans of the lower limb were performed with a mobile 3D scanner; "repeatability" and "interobserver reliability" of digital volumetry were tested. Furthermore, the method was applied on 31 patients suffering from chronic lymphedema. RESULTS: Calculations of repeatability of the volume based on 20 3D scans of the same lower leg showed a mean volume of 2.488 ± 0.011 liters (range: 2.470-2.510). The mean volume of the different examiners did not differ significantly (F(2,18) = 1.579, P = 0.233). The paired t-test showed a significant mean volume decrease of 375 mL (95% confidence interval = 245/505 mL) between pretreatment and post-treatment (t (30) = 5.892, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: 3D volumetry is a noninvasive, easy, and quick method to assess volume changes of the lower leg. Other than the low costs, it is reproducible and precise and therefore ideal for evolution of therapy in lymphedema.

Therapist versus Machine-Immediate Effects of Manual versus Mechanical Lymphatic Drainage in Patients with Secondary Lymphedema.

Background: Complex decongestive therapy (CDT) is the standard and basic therapy for lymphedema. The central component of CDT is manual lymphatic drainage (MLD). In addition to CDT, other measures such as intermittent pneumatic compression therapy (IPCT) (active compression machine therapy) are available. In this prospective research study, the objective and subjective effects of MLD and IPCT on lymphedema of the lower extremity were investigated and both therapies were directly compared. Furthermore, the patients' body mass index (BMI) and stage of lymphedema were tested for their effect on the respective therapy. Methods: Patients participating in the study received both therapies (MLD and IPCT) on the same lymphedema-affected limb at an interval of two days. The objective volumetric therapy effect was measured by the digital volume measurement of the affected limb. The subjective effects of the therapies were measured using two specially designed questionnaires. Results: A total of 40 patients were included in the study. There was no significant difference in the volume differences between the interventions, BMI categories, lymphedema, or treatment order regarding the immediate and two-day effect. Conclusions: No significant difference was found in the subjective or objective therapy efficacy of the two methods. Intermittent pneumatic compression therapy is considered a comparable therapeutic procedure when properly indicated.