Comparison of methods to diagnose lymphoedema among breast cancer survivors: 6-month follow-up
Comparison of methods to diagnose lymphoedema among breast cancer survivors: 6-month follow-up
复制标题
DOI：
10.1007/s10549-004-2045-x
复制
发表时间：
2005-02-01
影响因子：
3.8
通讯作者：
Newman, B
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Hayes, S;Cornish, B;Newman, B
淋巴水肿是乳腺癌最棘手和最可怕的并发症之一。我们的目的是确定乳腺癌治疗后6个月淋巴水肿的患病率，并在居住在东南部昆士兰州（n = 176）的女性人群样本中检查潜在的危险因素。如果治疗侧和未治疗侧的臂围总和（SOAC）之差> 5 cm，则定义为淋巴水肿（流行率= 11.9%）或> 10%（患病率= 0.6%），他们的多频生物电阻抗（MFBIA）评分大于或等于参考阻抗评分的3个标准差（患病率= 11.4%），或者当被问及在过去6个月内是否存在手臂肿胀时，他们回答“是”（患病率= 27.8%）。在MFBIA定义的淋巴水肿患者中，只有35%使用SOAC方法检测到（差异> 5 cm），而65%通过自我报告方法确定（即，敏感性）。SOAC（差异> 5 cm）和自我报告的特异性分别为88.5%和76.9%。当检查淋巴水肿的存在和一系列特征之间的关联时，结果也因用于评估淋巴水肿的方法而异。然而，其中一个更新颖和重要的。研究发现，与优势侧相比，在非优势侧治疗与淋巴水肿（MFBIA）风险增加80%相关。我们的工作提出了关于使用周长作为研究和临床环境中淋巴水肿测量的选择的问题，并评估了MFBIA作为一种潜在的替代方案。
One of the more problematic and dreaded complications of breast cancer is lymphoedema. Our objective was to determine the prevalence of lymphoedema 6-months following breast cancer treatment and to examine potential risk factors among a population-based sample of women residing in South-East Queensland (n = 176). Women were defined as having lymphoedema if the difference between the sum of arm circumferences (SOAC) of the treated and untreated sides was > 5 cm (prevalence = 11.9%) or > 10% (prevalence = 0.6%), their multi-frequency bioelectrical impedance (MFBIA) score was greater than or equal to 3 standard deviations above the reference impedance score (prevalence = 11.4%), or they reported 'yes' when asked if arm swelling had been present in the previous 6 months (prevalence = 27.8%). Of those with lymphoedema defined by MFBIA, only 35% were detected using the SOAC method (difference > 5 cm), while 65% were identified via the self-report method (i.e., respective sensitivities). Specificities for SOAC (difference > 5 cm) and self-report were 88.5% and 76.9%, respectively. When examining associations between presence of lymphoedema and a range of characteristics, findings also varied depending on the method used to assess lymphoedema. Nevertheless, one of the more novel and significant. findings was that being treated on the non-dominant, compared to dominant, side was associated with an 80% increased risk of having lymphoedema (MFBIA). Our work raises questions about the use of circumferences as the choice of measurement for lymphoedema in both research and clinical settings, and assesses MFBIA as a potential alternative.