{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02304964539007092, 'fraction_numerical': 0.005319148936170213, 'mean_word_length': 5.718253968253968, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Prevention of arm lymphedema through the use of compression sleeves following breast cancer: results from a targeted literature review

Abstract Background: Breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) is associated with impaired function and poorer quality of life. BCRL is also considered time-consuming and costly to treat. While compression treatment is considered the most efficient and effective form of treatment for early BCRL, its impact on the lymphatic system highlights its potential in the prevention of lymphedema. Objectives: To identify and summarise studies evaluating compression garment as a prevention strategy for BCRL. Methods: This is a targeted literature review of studies that evaluated use of compression garment in the prevention of BCRL, including prevention post-surgery and prevention of progression of subclinical lymphedema. Results: A total of 4 studies were identified that assessed the role of compression garment in the secondary (one randomized, controlled trial; n = 45) or tertiary (three cohort studies; sample size range: 111–508) prevention of BCRL. Together, findings from these studies suggest that use of compression garment was associated with reduced incidence, attenuation of lymphedema or prevention of progression to more severe lymphedema. However, the absence of a randomized, controlled trial in the tertiary setting means causal inferences relationship cannot be made. Conclusion: There is significant scope for further research, with consideration of possible benefits and costs associated with differences in compression class, duration or daily wear time, as well as comparison to other preventive strategies including patient preferences.