Search

Background: Hospital-at-home (H@H) models have gained recognition as a safe and potentially cost-effective solution for the current rising global healthcare needs. However, despite these models' potential, their adoption has been limited partly due to patients refusing care at home. This systematic review analyses the reasons behind their refusal., Methods: We searched five databases: Embase, Google Scholar, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science, limiting our search to papers from 2005 to 2024. Our search focused on papers reporting patient-provided reasons for declining treatment in a H@H setting without language or country restrictions. In addition to reasons for refusal, we extracted patient demographics and predictors for refusal to ensure a broad understanding of the factors influencing patient decisions. The quality of the studies included was evaluated using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) version 2018., Results: From the 1,067 articles identified, seven met our inclusion criteria. The papers reported reasons from 418 patients participating in diverse H@H models from the United States, United Kingdom, Spain, and Singapore, primarily focusing on acute home-based care. The most common reasons for declination included concerns about model effectiveness, safety at home, preference for in-hospital care, physician advice, family burden, and visitor concerns. Additionally, common significant demographic factors associated with decliners were the enrollment site, partnership or marital status, risk of adverse outcomes, and previous healthcare utilization., Conclusions: Understanding patients' motivations for declining H@H is crucial for its successful implementation. Targeted communication strategies and collaboration between healthcare providers are paramount to ensure that patients understand the benefits and safety of H@H models. Future research should explore effective communication and engagement techniques to address patient apprehensions and broaden H@H adoption., Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form (available at https://mhealth.amegroups.com/article/view/10.21037/mhealth-24-23/coif). The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare., (2024 AME Publishing Company. All rights reserved.)

Background and Objective: While significant sensation recovery improvements in neurotized breasts following reconstruction have been reported, sensation testing methods and surgical techniques have been widely variable. This narrative review aims to summarize available literature on current neurotization practices and sensory recovery outcomes in patients undergoing innervated breast reconstruction., Methods: A comprehensive literature search of PubMed Medline, Web of Science, and Embase was conducted to identify all studies reporting outcomes of neurotization in breast reconstruction surgeries. Data analyzed included operative times, neurotization techniques, sensory outcomes, and methods as well as patient reported outcomes., Key Content and Findings: Despite the heterogeneity of various studies reviewed, all forms of neurotization achieved earlier and superior sensory recovery throughout the reconstructed breast skin compared to non-innervated breasts. In absence of randomized controlled trials or high-quality comparative studies, further evidence is required to objectively confirm this technique offers better sensory recovery., Conclusions: Neurotization at the time of breast reconstruction may lead to improved sensation and patient reported outcomes delineating improved quality of life compared to non-innervated breasts. Future studies need to standardize the way that breast sensation is measured and determine pre-operative variables leading to expected changes in final sensation recovery to help manage surgical outcome expectations of both the surgeon and the patient., Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form (available at https://atm.amegroups.com/article/view/10.21037/atm-23-504/coif). The series “Breast Reconstruction” was commissioned by the editorial office without any funding or sponsorship. O.J.M. served as the unpaid Guest Editor of the series and serves as an unpaid editorial board member of Annals of Translational Medicine from July 2022 to June 2024. The authors have no other conflicts of interest to declare., (2024 Annals of Translational Medicine. All rights reserved.)

Background and Objective: Telemedicine and video consultation are crucial advancements in healthcare, allowing remote delivery of care. Telemedicine, encompassing various technologies like wearable devices, mobile health, and telemedicine, plays a significant role in managing illnesses and promoting wellness. The corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic accelerated the adoption of telemedicine, ensuring convenient access to medical services while maintaining physical distance. Legislation has supported its integration into clinical practice and addressed compensation issues. However, ensuring clinical appropriateness and sustainability of telemedicine post-expansion has gained attention. We south to identify the most friendly and resistant specialties to telemedicine and to understand areas of interest within those specialties to grasp potential barriers to its use., Methods: We aimed to identify articles that incorporated telemedicine in any medical or surgical specialty and determine the adoption rate and intent of this new form of care. Additionally, a secondary search within these databases was conducted to analyze the advantages, disadvantages, and implementation of telemedicine in the healthcare system. Non-English articles and those without full text were excluded. The study selection and data collection process involved using search terms such as "medicine", "surgery", "specialties", "telemedicine", and "telemedicine"., Key Content and Findings: Telemedicine adoption varies among specialties. The pandemic led to increased usage, with telemedicine consultations comprising 30.1% of all visits, but specialties like mental health, gastroenterology, and endocrinology showed higher rates of adoption compared to optometry, physical therapy, and orthopedic surgery., Conclusions: The data shows that telemedicine uptake varies by specialty and condition due to the need for physical exams. In-person visits still dominate new patient visits despite increased telemedicine use. Telemedicine cannot fully replace in-person care but has increased visit volume and is secure. The adoption of telemedicine is higher in medical practices than in surgical practices, with neurosurgery and urology leading. Further research is needed to assess telemedicine's suitability and effectiveness in different specialties and conditions., Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form (available at https://mhealth.amegroups.com/article/view/10.21037/mhealth-23-28/coif). B.M.D. serves as an unpaid editorial board member of mHealth from November 2022 to October 2024. B.M.D. reports Co-PI of a tele neonatology trial was funded by NIH, which is not a direct conflict of interest however a telemedicine topic. The other authors have no conflicts of interest to declare., (2024 mHealth. All rights reserved.)

Background and Objective: Surgical considerations for breast reconstruction (BR) in patients requiring neoadjuvant radiotherapy (NART) or adjuvant radiotherapy (ART) cannot be understated. The management of irradiated tissue leads surgeons to face several challenges. Therefore, it is essential to comprehensively understand the proper patient selection and preoperative planning to ensure the best outcomes and minimize the risk of complications. This narrative review aims to provide an update and summary of the most important technical considerations every breast surgeon must contemplate reconstructing the irradiated breast., Methods: The search strategy was performed on January 10th, 2023. The PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases were queried to capture all publications regarding surgical considerations in BR of patients undergoing NART and ART., Key Content and Findings: This review shows that the effects of radiotherapy (RT) on BR are still being studied. RT represents an essential factor for overall patient survival, and its use is increasing. However, the range of RT treatments across different cancer centers complicates the creation of a single treatment protocol. BR improves women's quality of life, so finding the proper integration of BR and RT is essential. When deciding on the reconstructive method, there are several factors to consider, such as the patient's body characteristics, tumor stage, RT protocol, and chemotherapy. To achieve the best surgical results and the most satisfied patient, using less aggressive and safer RT methods in the treatment sequence is recommended., Conclusions: The timing of the radiation will influence the selection of the best reconstructive methods to be employed in the breast cancer patient. However, there is clear evidence of preference for immediate autologous-based BR in cases due to the low rate of complications in the long term. But patient individualization is the key. Therefore, the benefits and risks of immediate versus delayed and autologous versus implant-based reconstruction must be weighed in every single case., Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form (available at https://atm.amegroups.com/article/view/10.21037/atm-23-1052/coif). The series “Breast Reconstruction” was commissioned by the editorial office without any funding or sponsorship. The authors have no other conflicts of interest to declare., (2023 Annals of Translational Medicine. All rights reserved.)

Background and Objective: Breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) represents a colossal burden in terms of health and patient-reported outcomes. Surgical management plays a prominent role in the psychological and physical well-being of women suffering from BCRL. Therefore, we performed a narrative review of the current surgical management of BCRL and analyzed the postoperative results., Methods: A literature search was conducted across PubMed MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science from database inception through January 2, 2023. We included English-written studies evaluating postoperative outcomes of lymphatic surgery for the management of BCRL., Key Content and Findings: The surgical management of lymphedema can be classified into two approaches: (I) physiologic procedures and (II) debulking or ablative procedures. While ablative procedures are intended to lessen the symptomatic burden of lymphedema via the removal of pathological tissues, physiologic procedures are performed to restore the abnormal lymphatic flow by creating bypasses into the venous or lymphatic circulation, or by creating new lymphatic connections by means of lymphangiogenesis. Physiologic procedures generate better outcomes in the early stages of lymphedema as there is some residual physiologic flow and vessels are less fibrotic, while ablative procedures are regarded to be the best alternative in very advanced lymphedema stages. A combination of physiologic and ablative procedures provides more comprehensive surgical management to BCRL., Conclusions: Lymphedema is a common complication of breast cancer treatment with an extensive incidence range. Postoperative outcomes of the surgical management of BCRL are heterogeneous despite most studies indicating favorable results after lymphatic surgery., Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form (available at https://atm.amegroups.com/article/view/10.21037/atm-23-292/coif). The series “Breast Reconstruction” was commissioned by the editorial office without any funding or sponsorship. O.J.M. served as the unpaid Guest Editor of the series, and serves as an unpaid editorial board member of Annals of Translational Medicine from July 2022 to June 2024. The authors have no other conflicts of interest to declare., (2023 Annals of Translational Medicine. All rights reserved.)

Gender confirmation surgery has a crucial role among transgender individuals. Phalloplasty is a procedure that uses flaps for phallic shaft creation. Flaps can be classified in free flaps or pedicle flaps and can be obtained from different donor sites such as forearm, thigh, abdomen, groin, and leg, and upper back. We conducted a systematic review about surgical flaps for phallic shaft creation in transgender patients. A systematic review was conducted on PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Clinical Answers, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases without timeframe limitations. Exclusion criteria included articles that reported phalloplasty on patients other than transgender, as well as other surgical techniques such as urethroplasty, vaginectomy, hysterectomy and studies focused on psychosocial outcomes. Two hundred twenty-eight potential articles were identified in the initial search. Forty-one studies fulfilled the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Surgical flaps for phallic shaft creation in transgender patients were reported on 1,391 cases. Microsurgical flaps were the most common (24 of 33). The flap technique most frequently described was radial forearm flap (15 of 33) followed by Anterolateral thigh flap (7 of 33), Latissimus dorsi flap (5 of 33), abdominal flap (4 of 33), fibular flap (3 of 33), and groin flaps (3 of 33). The literature on surgical flaps for phallic shaft creation in transgender patients reflected how challenging the reconstruction of the phallus is. In summary, there is no universal choice of flap that could be applied to every patient. Therefore, the surgical approach must be chosen considering surgeon experience, physical examination, and patient desire. We hope this review supports future studies on surgical flaps for phallic shaft creation in transgender patients., Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form (available at http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/atm-20-3527). The series “Transgender Surgery” was commissioned by the editorial office without any funding or sponsorship. XL served as the unpaid Guest Editor of the series. The authors have no other conflicts of interest to declare., (2021 Annals of Translational Medicine. All rights reserved.)

Transgender patients often desire to have biological children. However, their reproductive potential is often negatively impacted by gender affirming surgery (GAS) such as gender confirmation surgery (bottom surgery) and medical hormone therapy. Therefore, counselling patients on fertility preservation options before initiating gender-affirming treatments is prudent to avoid reducing their reproductive potential. A systematic review of English, Spanish, Chinese, French and Turkish languages from 2000 to December 23rd, 2019, using the preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) guidelines, was conducted. The search strategy was designed and conducted by an experienced librarian with input from the study's principle investigator. Fifteen articles that report outcomes of fertility preservation options in transgenders were included. Eight articles described options for transgender women, six reported options for transgender men and one included both transgender women and transgender men. Semen cryopreservation and oocyte cryopreservation are the most common and available methods for fertility preservation in transgenders. Physician awareness of fertility preservation options in transgender patients is crucial to ensure informed discussions regarding reproductive options in the early phase of transition., Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form (available at http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/atm-20-4523). The series “Transgender Surgery” was commissioned by the editorial office without any funding or sponsorship. OJM served as the unpaid Guest Editor of the series. The authors have no other conflicts of interest to declare., (2021 Annals of Translational Medicine. All rights reserved.)

Nipple-areola complex (NAC) reconstruction in transgender and gender non-binary (TGNB) individuals undergoing chest wall masculinization surgery is critical for adequate satisfaction and aesthetic results. Here, we conducted a systematic review to find the various techniques and outcomes of NAC reconstruction in double-incision mastectomy and free nipple grafts (DIM-FNG). A comprehensive search of several databases was conducted based on PRISMA guidelines. We included studies that described the NAC reconstruction technique after DIM-FNG, and evaluated the surgical outcomes, or satisfaction, or aesthetic results after a minimum duration of follow-up of 6 months. Studies were assessed for risk of bias. A qualitative synthesis was performed. A total of 19 studies, comprising 1,587 patients (3,174 breasts), were included. There was a total of 14 studies using the conventional FNG technique, 4 describing new approaches for NAC reconstruction in FNG and 1 study comparing the conventional FNG technique to another alternative technique. A total of 1,347 patients underwent DIM-FNG with conventional FNG and 240 underwent alternative techniques for NAC reconstruction after DIM-FNG. Postoperative complications were low, and satisfaction was high for conventional and alternative techniques. Newer techniques aim to reshape the new NACs in an oval shape, reduce nipple size and place the NACs using the pectoralis major lateral and inferior borders as reference. In addition, a horizontal oval incision at the recipient site may avoid an undesired vertical NAC., Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form (available at http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/atm-20-4522). The series “Transgender Surgery” was commissioned by the editorial office without any funding or sponsorship. OJM served as the unpaid Guest Editor of the series. The authors have no other conflicts of interest to declare., (2021 Annals of Translational Medicine. All rights reserved.)

Phalloplasty is the main treatment for gender dysphoria disorder. It is difficult to ascertain if staging of phalloplasty influences the rate of complications. We aim to describe and compare the rates of complication between single versus two-stage phalloplasty for transgender female-to-male patients. PubMed, Ovid Medline, EMBASE and SCOPUS databases were queried for studies reporting complications of female-to-male transgender patients who underwent phalloplasty. The keywords "phalloplasty", "female to male", "outcome", "complication" and synonyms in different combinations were used for the search. Only studies that could identify whether phallic shaft creation was performed in a single or two-stage procedure were included. From a total of 336 articles, 20 met the inclusion criteria. Sixteen studies reported complications associated with a single-stage phalloplasty and seven studies identified complications after a two-stage procedure. The most common complications found for both groups of staging were fistula, stricture and total/partial flap necrosis. Patients who underwent two-stage phalloplasty had higher complication rates (partial or total flap necrosis and fistulas), compared with the single-stage procedure (P<0.05). In conclusion, this systematic review identified the impact of staging in the rate of complications related to phalloplasty for transgender female-to-male patients; a two-stage phalloplasty has a higher rate of complications., Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form (available at http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/atm-20-3514). The series “Transgender Surgery” was commissioned by the editorial office without any funding or sponsorship. OJM served as the unpaid Guest Editor of the series. The other authors have no other conflicts of interest to declare., (2021 Annals of Translational Medicine. All rights reserved.)

Background: Facial Feminization Surgery (FFS) alters bone and soft tissue to feminize facial features of transgender females. This study aims to evaluate perceptions of femininity, attractiveness, and ideal surgical outcomes in transgender females, non-transgender females and plastic surgeons., Methods: The data was extracted from a survey of transgender females (n=104), non-transgender females (n=192) (completion rate of 48.4%) and plastic surgeons who performed FFS (n=23) (survey response rate of 31.5%). Five virtually-modified forms of three facial features, the nasal tip width, supratip break, mandibular gonial angles, and the composite images of the above features of an individual, assigned male at birth, were used. Respondents were requested to select and rank images based on personal perceptions of femininity and attractiveness., Results: Transgender females chose a narrower nasal tip width as more attractive (P≤0.001), and evaluated a more acute supratip angle, and more obtuse mandibular gonial angle as both more feminine and attractive (all P≤0.023) compared to non-transgender females. Plastic surgeons chose a more obtuse mandibular gonial angle as more feminine (P=0.007) and a more ideal surgical outcome (P=0.046), compared to transgender female respondents. In the assessment of composite images, non-transgender female ranked the options with more obtuse mandibular gonial angle as more feminine (all P≤0.036) than transgender females., Conclusions: Acknowledging the difference in transgender females' perceptions of facial femininity and attractiveness from non-transgender females and plastic surgeons could assist plastic surgeons in managing expectations of surgical outcomes., Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form (available at http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/atm-20-3376). The series “Transgender Surgery” was commissioned by the editorial office without any funding or sponsorship. XNL and JAP served as the unpaid Guest Editor of the series. The authors have no other conflicts of interest to declare., (2021 Annals of Translational Medicine. All rights reserved.)

Background: Vascularized lymph node transfer (VLNT) is a surgical procedure with high interest to treat lymphedema. Body mass index (BMI) is a well-described factor that increases the risk of lymphedema, but little is known about its influence on the surgical outcomes of lymphedema patients who undergo VLNT. The aim of this study was to analyze the impact of preoperative BMI on the long-term surgical outcomes after VLNT in lymphedema patients., Methods: We retrospectively compiled data of patients with International Society of Lymphology (ISL) stage II or III lymphedema who were treated with VLNT from July 2010 to July 2016 at China Medical University Hospital. Preoperative and postoperative demographic and clinical data, such as limb circumference and number of infection episodes were reviewed. Statistical analyses compared circumference reduction rates and infection episode reduction between preoperative BMI categories was done. In addition, prediction of outcomes based on quantitative preoperative BMI was analyzed., Results: A total of 83 patients met the inclusion criteria. Nine patients (10.8%) were normal weight, 43 (51.8%) were overweight, and 31 (37.3%) were obese. Compared with normal-weight patients, mean circumference reduction rates were significantly lower in overweight (P=0.005) and obese patients (P=0.02), but quantitative BMI was not correlated with circumference reduction rate (P=0.96). However, obese patients had a significantly greater reduction in infection episodes than normal-weight patients (P=0.03). In addition, greater BMI predicted greater reduction in infection episodes after VLNT (P=0.02)., Conclusions: VLNT is an effective surgical treatment, especially for lymphedema patients with higher preoperative BMIs. The results of our study suggest that this procedure considerably decreases the number of postoperative infection episodes per year in obese patients, even though preoperative BMI does not influence circumference reduction rate., Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form (available at http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/gs.2020.03.13). The series “Lymphedema” was commissioned by the editorial office without any funding or sponsorship. AJF served as the unpaid Guest Editor of the series. The other authors have no other conflicts of interest to declare., (2020 Gland Surgery. All rights reserved.)

The surgical treatment of lymphedema can be conducted alone or in combination with microsurgical autologous breast reconstruction. We performed a systematic review of the literature at PubMed database regarding autologous breast reconstruction for deep inferior epigastric perforators (DIEP) or muscle-sparing transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneous (ms-TRAM) and vascularized lymph node transfer (VLNT) in patients with lymphedema following breast cancer surgery. We hypothesized that autologous breast reconstruction combined with VLNT has positive outcomes. Eligibility criteria included investigations reporting data studies evaluating female patients with lymphedema in an upper extremity after breast cancer who underwent autologous breast reconstruction combined with VLNT. The search resulted in 93 potential papers, but only 6 studies fulfilled the study eligibility criteria. The total number of patients was 103. Most of the studies evaluated the outcomes in patients treated with DIEP or ms-TRAM combined with VLNT. The studies described groin lymph node transfer as treatment for lymphedema. In most of the studies, all patients reported a reduction of arm circumference, volume, and symptoms of the upper extremity with lymphedema comparing the preoperative to the postoperative period. Overall, patients experienced successful breast reconstruction. All authors reported reduction of the circumferential size of the affected upper limb, as well as a decrease in cellulitis, in addition to favorable breast reconstruction results., Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form (available at http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/gs.2020.02.11). The series “Lymphedema” was commissioned by the editorial office without any funding or sponsorship. XL serves as the unpaid editorial board member of Gland Surgery from Aug 2019 to Jul 2021 and served as the unpaid Guest Editor of the series. AJF served as the unpaid Guest Editor of the series. The other authors have no other conflicts of interest to declare., (2020 Gland Surgery. All rights reserved.)

Breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) incidence has been increasing overtime. Currently, there is not a preferred imaging tool for diagnosis, staging, and assessment of the disease. We aim to review the use of ultrasound elastography (UE) in BCRL patients. A systematic review was performed by querying PubMed, EMBASE, Ovid Healthstar, and Ovid Medline databases for studies that evaluated the use of UE in BCRL. The keywords "elastography" AND "lymphedema" in titles and abstracts were used for the search. The search retrieved 12, 12, 5 and 6 articles in each database, respectively. From these, only 4 met the inclusion criteria. UE methods included two-dimensional strain imaging, shear wave elastography (SWE), and global UE. Two of the studies evaluated the use of UE in the assessment of BCRL, while only 1 considered its use for diagnosis and staging. Based on our systematic review, UE appears to be a great tool in the assessment of BCRL to differentiate affected from non-affected arms., Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form (available at http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/gs.2020.02.08). The series “Lymphedema” was commissioned by the editorial office without any funding or sponsorship. XL serves as the unpaid editorial board member of Gland Surgery from Aug 2019 to Jul 2021 and served as the unpaid Guest Editor of the series. AJF served as the unpaid Guest Editor of the series. The other authors have no other conflicts of interest to declare., (2020 Gland Surgery. All rights reserved.)

Background: The combination of microvascular breast reconstruction (MBR) and vascularized lymph node transfer (VLNT) in a single-stage procedure is a surgical option for women who desire breast reconstruction and postmastectomy lymphedema surgery. In this study, we present a series of patients who underwent simultaneous lymphatic and MBR with the gastroepiploic VLNT (GE-VLNT) and the deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap respectively., Methods: Between 2018 and 2019, all consecutive patients diagnosed with lymphedema stage IIb-III International Society of Lymphology who opted to pursue simultaneous MBR with DIEP flap and GE-VLNT were included in this study. Patient demographics, comorbidities, prior radiation therapy, operative characteristics, surgical outcomes and complications were collected and analyzed., Results: Six patients underwent simultaneous unilateral MBR with DIEP flap and GE-VLNT. The mean age was 48±10.5 years and mean body mass index was 28.2±4.5 kg/m 2 . The flap survival rate was 100%. One patient required re-exploration due to venous congestion of the lymph node flap but was successfully salvaged. There was no donor site morbidity at the donor or recipient site for the DIEP flap were seen. The mean circumference reduction rate was 30.0%±5.1% (P<0.001). One patient stage III underwent additional liposuction at 12 months postoperative to improve final results., Conclusions: The combined use of DIEP flap and GE-VLNT flaps in a single-stage procedure is a safe and reliable surgical option for patients with postmastectomy lymphedema who desire and are suitable for autologous microvascular breast and lymphatic reconstruction., Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form (available at http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/gs.2020.01.14). The series “Lymphedema” was commissioned by the editorial office without any funding or sponsorship. AJF served as the unpaid Guest Editor of the series. The other authors have no other conflicts of interest to declare., (2020 Gland Surgery. All rights reserved.)

Breast cancer-related lymphedema is a long-term condition that affects almost half of breast cancer survivors. Clinical studies have looked at the benefits of lymphaticovenular anastomosis (LVA) for the treatment of upper extremities lymphedema after breast cancer, however, there is still controversy if it improves lymphedema. This study aimed to analyze the studies and outcomes related to LVA for breast cancer-related lymphedema. A PubMed/Medline search was performed using "lymphovenous bypass", "upper extremity lymphedema", "arm lymphedema after breast cancer treatment", and "lymphaticovenular anastomosis" as key words. Only English articles reporting outcomes after LVA were included. We found 22 articles that met the inclusion criteria. Positive outcomes were found in 21 studies with an objective volume reduction and subjective symptoms relief after LVA. This literature review concluded that LVA has demonstrated a significant decrease in upper extremity volumes and an improvement in subjectively reporting symptoms in breast cancer-related lymphedema patients., Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest: The series “Lymphedema” was commissioned by the editorial office without any funding or sponsorship. XL serves as the unpaid editorial board member of Gland Surgery from Aug 2019 to Jul 2021 and served as the unpaid Guest Editor of the series. AJF served as the unpaid Guest Editor of the series. The other authors have no other conflicts of interest to declare., (2020 Gland Surgery. All rights reserved.)

Background: Middle and distal insets of gastroepiploic vascularized lymph node transfer (GE-VLNT) for extremity lymphedema have been described. However, there has been no prior comparison of surgical or patient-reported outcomes between these techniques. We analyzed the outcomes between both insets in patients with extremity lymphedema., Methods: Retrospective review of patients with extremity-lymphedema who underwent GE-VLNT. Two groups were analyzed: middle and distal recipient inset. We analyzed 6-month surgical and patient-reported outcomes using the Lymphedema Life Impact Scale-v2 (LLISv2) and scar satisfaction utilizing the Patient Scar Assessment Questionnaire (PSAQ)., Results: Between 2017 and 2019, 26 patients with stage II unilateral extremity lymphedema underwent laparoscopically-harvested GE-VLNT (13 distal and 13 middle inset). There were no differences in patient demographics between groups. Mean hospital stay for patients with upper extremity lymphedema was 1.3 vs. 4.0 days (P<0.05), and for lower extremity lymphedema was 1.0 vs. 4.5 days (P<0.05), middle vs. distal inset, respectively. Mean return to daily activities for patients with upper extremity lymphedema was 13.4 vs. 33.4 days (P<0.05), and for lower extremity lymphedema was 16.0 vs. 29.5 days (P<0.05), middle vs. distal inset, respectively. Both middle and distal inset showed significant mean excess volume reduction at 6 months postoperatively for both upper and lower extremity lymphedema (upper extremity: middle inset 23.3%, distal inset: 22.0%; lower extremity: middle inset 23.3% and distal inset 13.3%). LLISv2 scores showed improved functional outcomes postoperatively in both upper and lower extremity lymphedema with both insets. Scar satisfaction with appearance and symptoms was higher with middle inset (P<0.05)., Conclusions: GE-VLNT is an effective surgical treatment for extremity lymphedema. The middle placement showed shorter hospital stay, early return to work and higher patient satisfaction., Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form (available at http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/gs.2020.02.10). The series “Lymphedema” was commissioned by the editorial office without any funding or sponsorship. AJF served as the unpaid Guest Editor of the series. The other authors have no other conflicts of interest to declare., (2020 Gland Surgery. All rights reserved.)

Background: A paradigm shift towards the use of combined physiological and excisional surgical approaches for the treatment of lymphedema is permeating the surgical practice worldwide. We describe a single-stage surgical approach combining-vaser assisted liposuction (VAL) and lymphatico-venous anastomoses (LVA) for the treatment of extremity-lymphedema., Methods: Between March 2018 and March 2019, a retrospective review of patients with extremity-lymphedema stage IIb-III International Society of Lymphology who underwent the combined technique was done. Demographics, operative characteristics, clinical outcomes and complications were assessed. Additionally, a systematic review of studies that reported combined physiological procedures with liposuction for the treatment of lymphedema was conducted., Results: A total of 24 patients [12 upper extremity lymphedema (UEL), and 12 lower extremity lymphedema (LEL)] were included and analyzed. The mean age was 54.5 years (38-72 years). The mean circumference reduction rate was 90% and 85% for UEL and LEL, respectively. Infection rate decreased to zero postoperatively in all patients. Ten studies were included in the review: six pooling 220 cases included two-stage procedures, and four pooling 66 cases described one-stage surgeries. All patients who underwent a combined approach reported clinical improvement., Conclusions: Our combined approach is safe surgical option and allows adequate limb size reduction with faster recovery in selected patients with lymphedema with strong fibroadipose component., Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form (available at http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/gs.2020.01.13). The series “Lymphedema” was commissioned by the editorial office without any funding or sponsorship. AJF served as the unpaid Guest Editor of the series. The other authors have no other conflicts of interest to declare., (2020 Gland Surgery. All rights reserved.)