ScholarWorksIndianapolis
  • Communities & Collections
  • Browse ScholarWorks
  • English
  • Català
  • Čeština
  • Deutsch
  • Español
  • Français
  • Gàidhlig
  • Italiano
  • Latviešu
  • Magyar
  • Nederlands
  • Polski
  • Português
  • Português do Brasil
  • Suomi
  • Svenska
  • Türkçe
  • Tiếng Việt
  • Қазақ
  • বাংলা
  • हिंदी
  • Ελληνικά
  • Yкраї́нська
  • Log In
    or
    New user? Click here to register.Have you forgotten your password?
  1. Home
  2. Browse by Author

Browsing by Author "Herrera, Fernando A."

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Results Per Page
Sort Options
  • Loading...
    Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Outcomes analysis of microsurgical physiologic lymphatic procedures for the upper extremity from the United States National Surgical Quality Improvement Program
    (Wiley, 2022-05) Bamba, Ravinder; Chu, Amanda; Gallegos, Jose; Herrera, Fernando A.; Hassanein, Aladdin H.; Medicine, School of Medicine
    INTRODUCTION: Physiologic microsurgical procedures to treat lymphedema include vascularized lymph node transfer (VLNT) and lymphovenous bypass (LVB). The purpose of this study was to assess 30-day outcomes of VLNT and LVB using the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database. METHODS: NSQIP was queried (2012-2018) for lymphatic procedures for upper extremity lymphedema after mastectomy. Prophylactic lymphatic procedures and those for lower extremity lymphedema were excluded. Outcomes were assessed for three groups: LVB, VLNT, and patients who had procedures simultaneously (VLNA+LVB). Primary outcomes measured were operative time, 30-day morbidities, and hospital length of stay. RESULTS: The study included 199 patients who had LVB (n = 43), VLNT (n = 145), or VLNT+LVB (n = 11). There was no difference in co-morbidities between the groups (p = 0.26). 30-day complication rates including unplanned reoperation (6.9% VLNT vs. 2.3% LVB) and readmission (0.69% VLNT vs. none in LVB) were not statistically significant (p = 0.54). Surgical site infection, wound complications, deep vein thromboembolism, and cardiac arrest was also similar among the three groups. Postoperative length of stay for VLNT (2.5 days± 2.3), LVB (1.9 days± 1.9), and VLNT+LVB (2.8 days± 0.3) did not differ significantly (p = 0.20). Operative time for LVB (305.4 min ± 186.7), VLNT (254 min ± 164.4), and VLNT+LVB (295.3 min ± 43.2) was not significantly different (p = 0.21). CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis of the NSQIP data revealed that VLNT and LVB are procedures with no significant difference in perioperative morbidity. Our results support that choice of VLNT versus LVB can be justifiably made per the surgeon's preference and experience as the operations have similar complication rates.
About IU Indianapolis ScholarWorks
  • Accessibility
  • Privacy Notice
  • Copyright © 2025 The Trustees of Indiana University