Effectiveness of Fluoroscopy-guided Manual Lymph Drainage (MLD) Versus Traditional MLD or Placebo MLD, as Part of Decongestive Lymphatic Therapy, for the Treatment of Breast Cancer-related Lymphoedema (BCRL): a Randomised Controlled Trial
Effectiveness of Fluoroscopy-guided Manual Lymph Drainage (MLD) Versus Traditional MLD or Placebo MLD, as Part of Decongestive Lymphatic Therapy, for the Treatment of Breast Cancer-related Lymphoedema (BCRL): a Randomised Controlled Trial
The main scientific objective of this multicentric double-blinded randomised controlled trial entails examining the effectiveness of fluoroscopy-guided MLD versus traditional MLD versus placebo MLD, applied as part of the intensive and maintenance phase of Decongestive Lymphatic Therapy, for the treatment of BCRL Secondary scientific objectives entail examining the relationship between different variables of lymphoedema at baseline
According to the International Society of Lymphology, lymphoedema needs to be treated with Decongestive Lymphatic Therapy (Consensus Document ISL 2013). This is a two-stage treatment programme. During the first or intensive phase, lymphoedema has to be maximally reduced. This phase consists of skin care, manual lymph drainage (MLD), multi-layer bandaging and exercise therapy. The second or maintenance phase aims to conserve and optimise the results obtained in the first phase. It consists of skin care, compression by a low-stretch elastic sleeve, exercises and lymph drainage. Skin care, multi-layer bandaging, elastic sleeve and exercises are treatment modalities that (after instructing the patient) can be performed by the patient herself. MLD has to be applied by a physical therapist and hence entails a big financial cost for the patient and the Health Care (Kärki et al 2009). The effectiveness of MLD applied during the intensive phase has been investigated by 5 randomised controlled trials, but there is conflicting evidence. So, further investigation is warranted to determine the relative benefit of MLD. The effectiveness of MLD applied during the maintenance phase has never been investigated (Devoogdt et al 2010, Oremus et al 2012, Huang et al 2013, Ezzo et al 2015).
A possible explanation why MLD is not obviously proven to be effective, is that MLD is applied in an inefficient way: during MLD, hand manoeuvres are applied on all lymph nodes and lymphatics that may be anatomically present. After axillary dissection and/ or radiotherapy (for the treatment of breast cancer), the lymphatic system is damaged: lymph nodes are removed and often fibrosis of the superficial lymphatic system occurs. As a result, rerouting of the lymphatic drainage occurs. Rerouting is patient-specific, consequently, it is possible that the traditional MLD needs be abandoned and a tailored approach needs to be established. Lymphofluoroscopy can aid to apply a more efficient MLD. During lymphofluoroscopy, a fluorescent substance is injected subcutaneously in the hand and it visualizes the transport of lymph from the hand up to the axilla and it demonstrates alternative pathways towards other lymph nodes.
A second explanation why the traditional method of MLD is not proven to be effective, is that research has shown that MLD with high pressure (vs low pressure) is more effective to improve lymph transport, as well as gliding (vs no gliding). During the new method of MLD (or fluoroscopy-guided MLD), the therapist only performs hand movements on functional lymphatics and lymph nodes. In addition, the hand movements are applied with higher pressure and lymph transport through the lymph collaterals is stimulated by applying strikes across the skin.
Therefore, the main scientific objective entails examining the effectiveness of fluoroscopy-guided MLD versus traditional MLD versus placebo MLD, applied as part of the intensive and maintenance phase of Decongestive Lymphatic Therapy, for the treatment of BCRL
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria: