Viren S Sehgal, Brandon Eric Ruggeberg, Michael James
Article: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10931544/
The study shines a light on the importance of effectively managing lymphedema, by comparing the effectiveness of intermittent pneumatic compression (IPC) compared with the main therapy for complex decongestive therapy (CDT), manual lymphatic drainage (MLD).1 Both MLD and IPC were performed in extremities suffering from lymphedema in two-day intervals, then therapies were quantified with volume measurement of the limb and a questionnaire for subjective symptoms. This study found no significant difference between either therapy in the effectiveness for CDT, both for volume measurement or subjective symptoms. Concluding that IPC is comparable, and not inferior, to the primary therapy for lymphedema. Furthermore, IPC care is more cost-effective than other therapies.2 A shift towards more frequent IPC use, with fewer MLD sessions annually, could lead to substantial healthcare savings without compromising patient care. Overall, the insights from this study offer promising directions for optimizing lymphedema maintenance therapy, aiming to strike a balance between treatment efficacy, patient comfort, and healthcare resource utilization.
- 1. Mendoza E, Amsler F. Effectiveness of manual lymphatic drainage and intermittent pneumatic compression in lymphedema maintenance therapy. Vasa. 2023;52(6):423-431. doi:10.1024/0301-1526/a001090
- 2. Schara M, Zeng M, Jumet B, Preston DJ. A low-cost wearable device for portable sequential compression therapy. Front Robot AI. 2022;9:1012862. Published 2022 Nov 14. doi:10.3389/frobt.2022.1012862
