Breast cancer treatment-related lymphedema (BCRL) is a common comorbidity in breast cancer survivors. Although magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is widely used to evaluate therapeutic response of patients with various medical conditions, it is not routinely used to evaluate lymphedema patients. We conducted a systematic review of the literature to identify studies on the use of MRI to evaluate therapy for BCRL. We hypothesized that MRI could provide information otherwise not possible through other examinations. On October 21, 2019, we conducted a systematic review on the PubMed/MEDLINE and Scopus databases, without time frame or language limitations, to identify studies on the use of MRI to evaluate therapy for BCRL. We excluded studies that investigated other applications of MRI, such as lymphedema diagnosis and surgical planning. Of 63 potential articles identified with the search, three case series fulfilled the eligibility criteria. In total, 53 patients with BCRL were included and quantitatively evaluated with MRI before and after manual lymphatic drainage. Authors used MRI or MR lymphagiography to investigate factors such as lymphatic vessel cross-sectional area, tissue water relaxation time (T2), and chemical exchange saturation transfer. The only study that compared MRI measurement with standard examinations reported that MRI added information to the therapy evaluation. MRI seems to be a promising tool for quantitative measurement of therapeutic response in patients with BCRL. However, the identified studies focused on only manual lymphatic drainage and were limited by the small numbers of patients. More studies are necessary to shed light on the topic.

Bladder acontractility affects several thousand patients in the United States, but the available therapies are limited. Latissimus dorsi detrusor myoplasty (LDDM) is a therapeutic option that allows patients with bladder acontractility to void voluntarily. Our goal was to conduct a systematic review of the literature to determine whether LDDM is a better option than clean intermittent catheterization (CIC) (standard treatment) in patients with bladder acontractility. On January 17, 2020, we conducted a systematic review of the PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Clinical Answers, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases, without time frame limitations, to identify articles on the use of LDDM for bladder acontractility. Of 75 potential articles, 4 fulfilled the eligibility criteria. The use of LDDM to treat patients with bladder acontractility was reported in four case series by the same group in Europe. Fifty-eight patients were included, and no comparison groups were included. The most common cause of bladder acontractility was spinal cord injury (n=36). The mean (±standard deviation) operative time was 536 (±22) minutes, postoperative length of hospital stay ranged from 10 to 13 days, and follow-up ranged from 9 to 68 months. Most patients had complete response, were able to void voluntarily, and had post-void residual volume less than 100 mL. Although promising outcomes have been obtained, evidence is still weak regarding whether LDDM is better than CIC to avoid impairment of the urinary tract among patients with bladder acontractility. Further prospective studies with control groups are necessary.

Bladder acontractility affects several thousand patients in the United States, but the available therapies are limited. Latissimus dorsi detrusor myoplasty (LDDM) is a therapeutic option that allows patients with bladder acontractility to void voluntarily. Our goal was to conduct a systematic review of the literature to determine whether LDDM is a better option than clean intermittent catheterization (CIC) (standard treatment) in patients with bladder acontractility. On January 17, 2020, we conducted a systematic review of the PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Clinical Answers, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases, without time frame limitations, to identify articles on the use of LDDM for bladder acontractility. Of 75 potential articles, 4 fulfilled the eligibility criteria. The use of LDDM to treat patients with bladder acontractility was reported in four case series by the same group in Europe. Fifty-eight patients were included, and no comparison groups were included. The most common cause of bladder acontractility was spinal cord injury (n=36). The mean (±standard deviation) operative time was 536 (±22) minutes, postoperative length of hospital stay ranged from 10 to 13 days, and follow-up ranged from 9 to 68 months. Most patients had complete response, were able to void voluntarily, and had post-void residual volume less than 100 mL. Although promising outcomes have been obtained, evidence is still weak regarding whether LDDM is better than CIC to avoid impairment of the urinary tract among patients with bladder acontractility. Further prospective studies with control groups are necessary.

The potential to differentiate into different cell lines, added to the easy and cost-effective method of extraction, makes adipose-derived stem cells (ADSCs) an object of interest in lymphedema treatment. Our study’s goal was to conduct a comprehensive systematic review of the use of ADSCs in lymphatic tissue engineering and regeneration. On July 23, 2019, using PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Clinical Answers, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Embase databases, we conducted a systematic review of published literature on the use of ADSCs in lymphatic tissue engineering and regeneration. There were no language or time frame limitations, and the following search strategy was applied: ((Adipose stem cell) OR Adipose-derived stem cell)) AND ((Lymphedema) OR Breast Cancer Lymphedema). Only original research manuscripts were included. Fourteen studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Eleven studies were experimental (in vitro or in vivo in animals), and only three were clinical. Publications on the topic demonstrated that ADSCs promote lymphangiogenesis, and its effect could be enhanced by modulation of vascular endothelial growth factor-C, interleukin-7, prospero homeobox protein 1, and transforming growth factor-β1. Pilot clinical studies included 11 patients with breast cancer-related lymphedema, and no significant side effects were present at 12-month follow-up. Literature on the use of ADSCs in lymphatic tissue engineering and regeneration demonstrated promising data. Clinical evidence is still in its infancy, but the scientific community agrees that ADSCs can be useful in regenerative lymphangiogenesis. Data collected in this review indicate that unprecedented advances in lymphedema treatment can be anticipated in the upcoming years.

The potential to differentiate into different cell lines, added to the easy and cost-effective method of extraction, makes adipose-derived stem cells (ADSCs) an object of interest in lymphedema treatment. Our study’s goal was to conduct a comprehensive systematic review of the use of ADSCs in lymphatic tissue engineering and regeneration. On July 23, 2019, using PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Clinical Answers, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Embase databases, we conducted a systematic review of published literature on the use of ADSCs in lymphatic tissue engineering and regeneration. There were no language or time frame limitations, and the following search strategy was applied: ((Adipose stem cell) OR Adipose-derived stem cell)) AND ((Lymphedema) OR Breast Cancer Lymphedema). Only original research manuscripts were included. Fourteen studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Eleven studies were experimental (in vitro or in vivo in animals), and only three were clinical. Publications on the topic demonstrated that ADSCs promote lymphangiogenesis, and its effect could be enhanced by modulation of vascular endothelial growth factor-C, interleukin-7, prospero homeobox protein 1, and transforming growth factor-β1. Pilot clinical studies included 11 patients with breast cancer-related lymphedema, and no significant side effects were present at 12-month follow-up. Literature on the use of ADSCs in lymphatic tissue engineering and regeneration demonstrated promising data. Clinical evidence is still in its infancy, but the scientific community agrees that ADSCs can be useful in regenerative lymphangiogenesis. Data collected in this review indicate that unprecedented advances in lymphedema treatment can be anticipated in the upcoming years.