Physical Therapies in the Decongestive Treatment of Lymphedema

December 16, 2012 updated by: Isabel Forner-Cordero, MD, PhD.

Physical Therapies in the Decongestive Treatment of Lymphedema: A Multicenter, Randomized, Controlled Study.

The purpose of this multicenter randomised controlled study is to determine whether manual lymphatic drainage (MLD) brings any benefit when added to intermittent pneumatic compression (IPC) plus multilayer, multicomponent bandages (MB) in the decongestive lymphatic therapy (DLT) in patients with lymphedema

Study Overview

Status

Status

Indicates the current recruitment status or the expanded access status.
Completed

Conditions

Conditions

The disease, disorder, syndrome, illness, or injury that is being studied. On ClinicalTrials.gov, conditions may also include other health-related issues, such as lifespan, quality of life, and health risks.

Intervention / Treatment

Intervention / Treatment

A process or action that is the focus of a clinical study. Interventions include drugs, medical devices, procedures, vaccines, and other products that are either investigational or already available. Interventions can also include noninvasive approaches, such as education or modifying diet and exercise.

Detailed Description

Study Design: the study was a multicenter, randomized controlled study conducted at three university hospitals in Spain. Potential subjects were identified at Rehabilitation Department where physicians were responsible for screening subjects for eligibility and enrolling into the study.

Patients that fulfilled the inclusion criteria and signed up the informed consent were stratified within 2 stratums, upper and lower limb lymphedema, and then were randomized to one of the three treatment groups.

The type of randomization was a total randomization with ratio 1:1:1 and the method used to generate the random allocation sequence was a computer-generated random numbers table. Adequate randomization includes calling a central office once eligibility has been determined.

The physicians that assessed the outcome and the statistic who analyzed de data were blinded to the subjects' treatment assignment.

The study was approved by the Research Ethics Committee of the University Hospital La Fe. It was conducted according to the ethical principles laid down in the declaration of Helsinki (52nd World Medical Association General Assembly, Edinburgh, Scotland, October 2000) and the rules of best clinical practice.

Treatment Regimens: Patients were randomized to one of the following treatment groups:

  • Group A or control group: Manual Lymphatic Drainage (MLD) with Földi's technique by an expert therapist during 45 minutes; intermittent pneumatic compression (IPC) with multicompartmental pump between 50 to 80 mmHg during 30 minutes, followed by multilayer, multicomponent bandages (MB) until next day.
  • Group B: Pneumatic massage with Lymphapress-Plus(TM) device that was lent during the duration of the study during 20 minutes, and was supposed to open the proximal lymphatics at the root of the limb; IPC (50 to 80 mmHg during 30 minutes), followed by MB until next day.
  • Group C: IPC (50 to 80 mmHg during 30 minutes) followed by MB until next day.

All patients were planned to receive 20 sessions of treatment (5 per week in consecutive days during 4 consecutive weeks) and were trained in skin care and daily exercises.

After DLT, garments were prescribed and their adaptation was checked to warrant the maintenance of the results. The garments were flat knitted, custom made, generally class 2 (18-21 mmHg) for upper limb, and class 3 (36-46 mmHg) for lower limb.

Sample Size and Statistical analyses: This trial compares the efficacy of two treatment modalities without MLD (experimental group B and C) with a standard trimodal therapy (control group A). The expected effect size in percentage reduction in excess volume (PREV), primary end point, for the control group (MLD+IPC+MB) was defined from the review of literature and was 50 to 70% (mean 60%) with a standard deviation of 20 to 30 (mean 25). Our hypothesis was that there are no differences between experimental and standard treatment.

The required sample size for the study was 177 patients or 59 subjects per group to detect differences greater than or equal 15% in the percentage reduction in excess volume (PREV) between control and experimental groups, if exists; considering differences less than 15% as not clinically significant. It was based on an alpha error of 5% and a power of 90%. We estimated a drop-out rate of 10%. Therefore, 17 patients were added, resulting in a sample size of 194 subjects.

To compare baseline characteristics between three groups we use two-way ANOVA test for continuous variable and Pearson's chi2 for categorical data, to detect potential confounding factors. Outcome data were analyzed utilizing a two-way ANOVA test to assess differences between treatment groups with a 5% level of significance (p≤0.05) and two-tailed tests.

An exploratory subgroup analysis was made to identify factors associated with response (PREV). Factors for initial screening were identified by univariate linear regression model with a p value <0.1. In order to determine the independent predictive factors, a multivariate linear regression analysis was applied.

Study Type

Study Type

Describes the nature of a clinical study. Study types include interventional studies (also called clinical trials), observational studies (including patient registries), and expanded access.
Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

Enrollment

The number of participants in a clinical study. The "anticipated" enrollment is the target number of participants that the researchers need for the study.
194

Phase

Phase

The stage of a clinical trial studying a drug or biological product, based on definitions developed by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The phase is based on the study's objective, the number of participants, and other characteristics. There are five phases: Early Phase 1 (formerly listed as Phase 0), Phase 1, Phase 2, Phase 3, and Phase 4. Not Applicable is used to describe trials without FDA-defined phases, including trials of devices or behavioral interventions.
  • Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

  • Spain
      • Valencia, Spain, 46026
        • University Hospital La Fe

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Eligibility Criteria

The key requirements that people who want to participate in a clinical study must meet or the characteristics they must have. Eligibility criteria consist of both inclusion criteria (which are required for a person to participate in the study) and exclusion criteria (which prevent a person from participating). Types of eligibility criteria include whether a study accepts healthy volunteers, has age or age group requirements, or is limited by sex.

Ages Eligible for Study

18 years and older (Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • primary or secondary lymphedema,
  • lymphedema stages II or III
  • affecting unilateral upper or lower limb
  • Excess volume (EV) > 10%

Exclusion Criteria:

  • malignancy or active neoplasm disease or lack of information about it.
  • active lymphangitis
  • known contraindications for Decongestive Lymphatic Therapy (DLT): renal insufficiency, uncontrolled hypertension, cardiac disease and venous thrombosis.
  • a course of DLT during last year.
  • anything that could alter the patient's capability to consent truly to participate in this study

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Treatment
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: Double

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm

Participant Group / Arm

A group or subgroup of participants in a clinical trial that receives a specific intervention/treatment, or no intervention, according to the trial's protocol.
Intervention / Treatment

Intervention / Treatment

A process or action that is the focus of a clinical study. Interventions include drugs, medical devices, procedures, vaccines, and other products that are either investigational or already available. Interventions can also include noninvasive approaches, such as education or modifying diet and exercise.
Active Comparator: Standard trimodality therapy with MLD
Manual Lymphatic Drainage (MLD) followed by intermittent pneumatic compression (IPC) and followed by multilayer, multicomponent bandages (MB) until next day.
Other: Manual Lymphatic Drainage (MLD)
MLD with Földi's technique by an expert therapist during 45 minutes
Device: Generic intermittent pneumatic compression Device (IPC)
Generic intermittent pneumatic compression with multicompartmental pump between 50 to 80 mmHg during 30 minutes.
Other: multilayer, multicomponent bandages (MB)
multilayer, multicomponent bandages (MB) until next day.
Experimental: Trimodality therapy with LPD
Pneumatic massage with Lymphapress-Plus(TM) device (LPD) followed by intermittent pneumatic compression (IPC) and followed by multilayer, multicomponent bandages (MB) until next day
Device: Generic intermittent pneumatic compression Device (IPC)
Generic intermittent pneumatic compression with multicompartmental pump between 50 to 80 mmHg during 30 minutes.
Other: multilayer, multicomponent bandages (MB)
multilayer, multicomponent bandages (MB) until next day.
Device: Lymphapress-Plus(TM) device (LPD)
Pneumatic massage with Lymphapress-Plus(TM)device that was lent during the duration of the study during 20 minutes.
Experimental: Bimodality therapy without MLD
intermittent pneumatic compression (IPC) followed by multilayer, multicomponent bandages (MB) until next day.
Device: Generic intermittent pneumatic compression Device (IPC)
Generic intermittent pneumatic compression with multicompartmental pump between 50 to 80 mmHg during 30 minutes.
Other: multilayer, multicomponent bandages (MB)
multilayer, multicomponent bandages (MB) until next day.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Primary Outcome Measures

In a clinical study's protocol, the planned outcome measure that is the most important for evaluating the effect of an intervention/treatment. Most clinical studies have one primary outcome measure, but some have more than one.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Percentage reduction in Excess Volume (PREV)
Time Frame: at 10 sessions of DLT (2 weeks), at 20 sessions of DLT (4 weeks) and at 1, 6 and 12 months after the end of DLT

It is obtained with the following formula: [(Initial EV - Final EV)/ Initial EV] x 100; where Excess Volume (EV) is the difference between Lymphedematous (VL) and Healthy limb volume (VH).

Volumes were calculated with tape perimeter measurements (C) taken from the dorsum of the hand (C1) and repeated for every 4 cm proximally until the axilla (Cn), using Kuhnke formula, as the disk model is considered the method of choice in clinical practice.

We assessed the change from baseline in PREV during Decongestive Lymphedema Treatment (DLT)and during 12 months of follow-up after DLT.
at 10 sessions of DLT (2 weeks), at 20 sessions of DLT (4 weeks) and at 1, 6 and 12 months after the end of DLT

Secondary Outcome Measures

Secondary Outcome Measures

In a clinical study's protocol, a planned outcome measure that is not as important as the primary outcome measure for evaluating the effect of an intervention but is still of interest. Most clinical studies have more than one secondary outcome measure.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
the Percentage of Volume reduction (PRV)
Time Frame: at 10 sessions of DLT (2 weeks), at 20 sessions of DLT (4 weeks) and at 1, 6 and 12 months after the end of DLT

it was calculated with the following formula: [(Initial VL - Final VL)/ Initial VL] x 100.

We assessed the change from baseline in PRV during Decongestive Lymphedema Treatment (DLT)and during 12 months of follow-up after DLT.
at 10 sessions of DLT (2 weeks), at 20 sessions of DLT (4 weeks) and at 1, 6 and 12 months after the end of DLT

Other Outcome Measures

Other Outcome Measures

For clinical trials, a planned measurement described in the protocol that is used to determine the effect of an intervention/treatment on participants. For observational studies, a measurement or observation that is used to describe patterns of diseases or traits, or associations with exposures, risk factors, or treatment. Types of outcome measures include primary outcome measure and secondary outcome measure.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Adverse events related to the treatment
Time Frame: at 10 sessions of DLT (2 weeks), at 20 sessions of DLT (4 weeks) and at 1, 6 and 12 months after the end of DLT
Discomfort Lymphangitis attacks Edema displacement Fibrosclerotic ring Loss of mobility
at 10 sessions of DLT (2 weeks), at 20 sessions of DLT (4 weeks) and at 1, 6 and 12 months after the end of DLT

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Sponsor

Sponsor

The organization or person who initiates the study and who has authority and control over the study.
Isabel Forner-Cordero, MD, PhD.

Investigators

Investigators

A researcher involved in a clinical study. Related terms include site principal investigator, site sub-investigator, study chair, study director, and study principal investigator.
  • Study Director: Isabel I Forner-Cordero, MD, Phd, University Hospital La Fe
  • Principal Investigator: Jose J Muñoz-Langa, MD, Phd, University Hospital Dr Peset

Publications and helpful links

The person responsible for entering information about the study voluntarily provides these publications. These may be about anything related to the study.

General Publications

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start

Study Start

The actual date on which the first participant was enrolled in a clinical study. The "anticipated" study start date is the date that the researchers think will be the study start date.
February 1, 2004

Primary Completion (Actual)

Primary Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention to collect final data for the primary outcome measure. Whether the clinical study ended according to the protocol or was terminated does not affect this date. For clinical studies with more than one primary outcome measure with different completion dates, this term refers to the date on which data collection is completed for all the primary outcome measures. The "anticipated" primary completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the primary completion date for the study.
January 1, 2010

Study Completion (Actual)

Study Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention/treatment to collect final data for the primary outcome measures, secondary outcome measures, and adverse events (that is, the last participant's last visit). The "anticipated" study completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the study completion date.
June 1, 2012

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

First Submitted

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submitted a study record to ClinicalTrials.gov. There is typically a delay of a few days between the first submitted date and the record's availability on ClinicalTrials.gov (the first posted date).
December 6, 2012

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submits a study record that is consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. The sponsor or investigator may need to revise and submit a study record one or more times before NLM's QC review criteria are met. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
December 11, 2012

First Posted (Estimate)

First Posted

The date on which the study record was first available on ClinicalTrials.gov after National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review has concluded. There is typically a delay of a few days between the date the study sponsor or investigator submitted the study record and the first posted date.
December 12, 2012

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Estimate)

Last Update Posted

The most recent date on which changes to a study record were made available on ClinicalTrials.gov. There may be a delay between when the changes were submitted to ClinicalTrials.gov by the study's sponsor or investigator (the last update submitted date) and the last update posted date.
December 18, 2012

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator submitted changes to a study record that are consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
December 16, 2012

Last Verified

Last Verified

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator confirmed the information about a clinical study on ClinicalTrials.gov as accurate and current. If a study with a recruitment status of recruiting; not yet recruiting; or active, not recruiting has not been confirmed within the past 2 years, the study's recruitment status is shown as unknown.
December 1, 2012

More Information

Terms related to this study

Keywords

Additional Relevant MeSH Terms

Other Study ID Numbers

Other Study ID Numbers

Identifiers or ID numbers other than the NCT number that are assigned to a clinical study by the study's sponsor, funders, or others. These numbers may include unique identifiers from other trial registries and National Institutes of Health grant numbers.
  • HULaFe-LYMPHEDEMA-04

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on Secondary Lymphedema

Clinical Trials on Manual Lymphatic Drainage (MLD)

Search Similar Trials

Sponsors and Collaborators

Medical Conditions

Drug Interventions

Conditions

Rare Diseases

Drug Interventions

Dietary Supplements

Sponsor/Collaborators

Locations

Cookie Settings

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. For more details carefully read our Privacy and Cookies Policy. ...>>>You can change your preferences or withdraw your consent at any time by deleting the cookies from your website or computer as described in the policy. Please accept it and choose your preferences by ticking the corresponding boxes in the "Manage Settings" section below. Please carefully read our Terms of Service before you proceed with using any part of this website.
«Manage Settings