Your search

In authors or contributors
  • Lipedema, lipohypertrophy and secondary lymphedema are three conditions characterized by disproportionate subcutaneous fat accumulation affecting the extremities. Despite the apparent similarities and differences among their phenotypes, a comprehensive histological and molecular comparison does not yet exist, supporting the idea that there is an insufficient understanding of the conditions and particularly of lipohypertrophy. In our study, we performed histological and molecular analysis in anatomically-, BMI- and gender-matched samples of lipedema, lipohypertrophy and secondary lymphedema versus healthy control patients. Hereby, we found a significantly increased epidermal thickness only in patients with lipedema and secondary lymphedema, while significant adipocyte hypertrophy was identified in both lipedema and lipohypertrophy. Interestingly, the assessment of lymphatic vessel morphology showed significantly decreased total area coverage in lipohypertrophy versus the other conditions, while VEGF-D expression was significantly decreased across all conditions. The analysis of junctional genes often associated with permeability indicated a distinct and higher expression only in secondary lymphedema. Finally, the evaluation of the immune cell infiltrate verified the increased CD4+ cell and macrophage infiltration in lymphedema and lipedema respectively, without depicting a distinct immune cell profile in lipohypertrophy. Our study describes the distinct histological and molecular characteristics of lipohypertrophy, clearly distinguishing it from its two most important differential diagnoses.

  • OBJECTIVE: Upper extremity lymphedema (UEL) is a burdensome disease with significant impact on quality of life underscoring the importance of quality of life measurements in this patient population. Only recently, the LYMPH Q Upper Extremity Module, a new patient-reported outcome measurement (PROM), has been developed. The aim of the study was to translate the LYMPH Q Upper Extremity Module from English to German and perform a comprehensive validation. METHODS: Translation was performed in accordance with the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR) best-practice guidelines. To validate the German LYMPH Q, a multicenter study was conducted. Internal consistency was determined by Cronbach's alpha. Reliability was assessed by the intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC). To analyse construct validity, a Pearson correlation coefficient between the LYMPH Q, quickDASH and SF-36 was calculated. Responsiveness was assessed by comparing the pre- and postoperative LYMPH Q scores in five patients receiving lymphatic reconstructive surgery. RESULTS: Validation was performed in a cohort of 65 patients. Internal consistency of the different domains was good to excellent (α: 0.87-0.97). ICC ranged from 0.74 to 0.92. The domains of the LYMPH Q correlated significantly with the corresponding domains of the SF-36 and quick DASH. Construct validity was good with eight of ten hypotheses confirmed. Significant improvements of function (46.4 ± 13.3 vs. 77.8 ± 11.5; p= 0.03), symptoms (42.0 ± 10.7 vs. 70.6 ± 11.6; p= 0.02) and psychological well-being (40.4 ± 14.6 vs. 78.0 ± 17.3; p= 0.03) were observed after lymphatic reconstructive surgery. CONCLUSION: The German version of The LYMPH Q Upper Extremity Module is conceptually equivalent to the original English version. It is a reliable and valid PROM to assess physical and psychological impairments in patients with UEL.

Last update from database: 11/24/24, 8:42 AM (UTC)

Explore

Resource type

Publication

Online resource