Advertisement

Procedural Recommendations for Lymphoscintigraphy in the Diagnosis of Peripheral Lymphedema: the Genoa Protocol

  • G. Villa
  • C. C. Campisi
  • M. Ryan
  • F. Boccardo
  • P. Di Summa
  • M. Frascio
  • G. Sambuceti
  • C. Campisi
Perspective
  • 14 Downloads

Abstract

Introduction

Lymphoscintigraphy is the gold standard for imaging in the diagnosis of peripheral lymphedema. However, there are no clear guidelines to standardize usage across centers, and as such, large variability exists. The aim of this perspectives paper is to draw upon the knowledge and extensive experience of lymphoscintigraphy here in Genoa, Italy, from our center of excellence in the assessment and treatment of lymphatic disorders for over 30 years to provide general guidelines for nuclear medicine specialists.

Method

The authors describe the technical characteristics of lymphoscintigraphy in patients with limb swelling. Radioactive tracers, dosage, administration sites, and the rationale for a two-compartment protocol with the inclusion of subfascial lymphatic vessels are all given in detail.

Results

Examples of lymphoscintigraphic investigations with various subgroups of patients are discussed. The concept of a transport index (TI) for semi-quantitative analysis of normal/pathological lymphatic flow is introduced. Different concepts of injection techniques are outlined.

Discussion

It is past time that lymphoscintigraphy in the diagnosis of lymphatic disorders becomes standardized. This represents our first attempt to outline a clear protocol and delineate the relevant points for lymphoscintigraphy in this patient population.

Keywords

Lymphoscintigraphy Epifascial and subfascial lymphatic vessels Semi-quantitative transport index Limb swelling 

Notes

Acknowledgements

None.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

Giuseppe. Villa, Corrado C Campisi, Melissa Ryan, Francesco Boccardo, Pietro di Summa, Marco Frascio, Gianmario Sambuceti, and Corradino Campisi declare that they have no conflict of interest. There is no source of funding.

Ethical Statement

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed Consent

The institutional board of our Institution reviewed the study and approved it as a retrospective study, waiving the need for formal consent. Although no formal consent was required, patients gave their written consent to use their anonymous data.

References

  1. 1.
    Weissleder H, Weissleder R. Lymphedema: evaluation of qualitative and quantitative lymphoscintigraphy in 238 patients. Radiology. 1988;167:729–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bräutigam P, Földi E, Schaiper I, Krause T, Vanscheidt W, Moser E. Analysis of lymphatic drainage in various forms of leg edema using two compartment lymphoscintigraphy. Lymphology. 1998;31:43–55.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Logan V. Incidence and prevalence of lymphoedema: a literature review. J Clin Nurs. 1995;4:213–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Szuba A, Shin WS, Strauss HW, Rockson S. The third circulation: radionuclide lymphoscintigraphy in the evaluation of lymphedema. J Nucl Med. 2003;44:43–57.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Segerstrom K, Bjerle P, Graffman S, Nystrom A. Factors that influence the incidence of brachial oedema after treatment of breast cancer. Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg Hand Surg. 1992;26:223–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chatani M, Nose T, Masaki N, Inoue T. Adjuvant radiotherapy after radical hysterectomy of the cervical cancer: prognostic factors and complications. Strahlenther Onkol. 1998;174:504–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Rainwater LM, Zincke H. Radical prostatectomy after radiation therapy for cancer of the prostate: feasibility and prognosis. J Urol. 1988;140:1455–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Solsona E, Iborra I, Monros JL, Ricos JV, Mazcunan F, Vazquez C. Penile and scrotal lymphedema of radiation origin: its surgical treatment. Actas Urol Esp. 1986;10:45–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Moghimi SM, Bonnemain B. Subcutaneous and intravenous delivery of diagnostic agents to the lymphatic system: applications in lymphoscintigraphy and indirect lymphography. Adv Drug Deliv Rev. 1999;37:295–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Yoshida RY, Kariya S, Ha-Kawa S, Tanigaw N. Lymphoscintigraphy for imaging of the lymphatic flow disorders. Tech Vasc Interv Radiol. 2016;19(4):273–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Williams WH, Witte CL, Witte MH, McNeill GC. Radionuclide lymphangioscintigraphy in the evaluation of peripheral Lymphoedema. Clin Nucl Med. 2000;25:451–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Berenji GR, Iker E, Glass EC. Lymphoscintigraphic findings in chylous reflux in a lower extremity. Clin Nucl Med. 2007;32:725–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Baulieu F, Baulieu JL, Mesny J, et al. Visualization of the thoracic duct by lymphoscintigraphy. Eur J Nucl Med. 1987;13:264–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    ICRP. Radiation dose to patients from radiopharmaceuticals. ICRP Publication 53. Ann ICRP. 1988;18(1–4).Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Keleher A, Wendt R 3rd, Delpassand E, Stachowiak AM, Kuerer HM. The safety of lymphatic mapping in pregnant breast cancer patients using Tc-99m sulfur colloid. Breast J. 2004;10:492–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    British Nuclear Medicine Society. BNMS clinical guidelines—lymphoscintigraphy. 2011. https://www.bnms.org.uk/images/Lymphoscintigraphy_2016_NEW.pdf.
  17. 17.
    Mostbeck A, Partsch H. Isotope lymphography: possibilities and limits in evaluation of lymph transport. Wien Med Wochenschr. 1999;149:87–91.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Brautigam P, Vanscheidt W, Foldi E, Krause T, Moser E. The importance of the subfascial lymphatics in the diagnosis of lower limb edema: investigations with semiquantitative lymphoscintigraphy. Angiology. 1993;44:464–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Stanton AW, Mellor RH, Cook GJ, Svensson WE, Peters AM, Levick JR, et al. Impairment of lymph drainage in subfascial compartment of forearm in breast cancer-related lymphedema. Lymphat Res Biol. 2003;1:121–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Hassanein AH, Maclellan RA, Grant FD, Greene AK. Diagnostic accuracy of lymphoscintigraphy for lymphedema and analysis of false-negative tests. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2017;5:e1396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    de Godoy JM, Iozzi AJ, Azevedo WF Jr, Godoy MF. New method to assess manual lymph drainage using lymphoscintigraphy. Nucl Med Rev. 2012;15(2):140–2.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Suga K, Kume N, Matsunaga N, Motoyama K, Hara A, Ogasawara N. Assessment of leg oedema by dynamic lymphoscintigraphy with intradermal injection of technetium-99m human serum albumin and load produced by standing. Eur J Nucl Med. 2001;28(3):294–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Weiss M, Baumeister RG, Hahn K. Dynamic lymph flow imaging in patients with oedema of the lower limb for evaluation of the functional outcome after autologous lymph vessel transplantation: an 8-year follow-up study. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2003;30(2):202–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Baulieu F, Bourgeois P, Maruani A, Belgrado JP, Tauveron V, Lorette G, et al. Contributions of spect/ct imaging to the lymphoscintigraphic investigations of the lower limb lymphedema. Lymphology. 2013;46:106–19.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kleinhans E, Baumeister RGH, Hahn D, Siuda S, Bull U, Moser E. Evaluation of transport kinetics in lymphoscintigraphy: follow-up study in patients with transplanted lymphatic vessels. Eur J Nucl Med. 1985;10:349–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Weiss M, Baumeister RGH, Frick A, Wallmichrath J, Bartenstein P, Rominger A. Primary lymphedema of the lower limb: the clinical utility of single photon emission computed tomography/CT. Korean J Radiol. 2015;16:188–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Cambria RA, Gloviczki P, Naessen JM, Wahner HW. Noninvasive evaluation of the lymphatic system with lymphoscintigraphy: a prospective, semi-quantitative analysis in 386 extremities. J Vasc Surg. 1993;18:773–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Keramida G, Wroe E, Winterman N, Aplin M, Peters AM. Lymphatic drainage efficiency: a new parameter of lymphatic function. Acta Radiol. 2017.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Dylke ES, McEntee MF, Schembri GP, Brennan PC, Bailey E, Ward LC, et al. Reliability of a radiological grading system for dermal backflow in lymphoscintigraphy imaging. Acad Radiol. 2013;20:758–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Baulieu F, Tauveron V, Erra B, Muller C, Courtehoux M, Venel Y, et al. Lymphoscintigraphy in limb lymphoedema: current methodology and interests. Méd Nucl. 2015;39:26–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    O'Donnell TF, Rasmussen JC, Sevick-Muraca EM. New diagnostic modalities in the evaluation of lymphedema. J Vasc Surg: Venous Lymphat Disord. 2017;5:261–73.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Korean Society of Nuclear Medicine 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.U.O. of Nuclear MedicinePolyclinic Hospital ‘San Martino’GenoaItaly
  2. 2.Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery—GVM Care & ResearchPrivate Hospitals, Reggio Emilia, Rapallo (GE)TurinItaly
  3. 3.Department of Surgery (DISC), Unit of Lymphatic Surgery & MicrosurgeryPolyclinic Hospital ‘San Martino’GenoaItaly
  4. 4.Department of Plastic and Reconstructive SurgeryUniversity Hospital of Lausanne CHUVLausanneSwitzerland
  5. 5.Department of Surgery (DISC)Polyclinic Hospital ‘San Martino’GenoaItaly

Personalised recommendations