BackgroundWhen managing patients with cancer, lymphedema of the lower limbs (LLL) is commonly reported as secondary to the surgical excision and/or irradiation of lymph nodes (LNs). In the framework of lymphoscintigraphic imaging performed to evaluate secondary LLL, some lympho-nodal presentations have been observed that could not be explained by the applied treatments, suggesting that these LLL might be primary. Therefore, all our lymphoscintigraphic examinations that were performed in patients for LLL after surgery for gynecological or urological cancer were retrospectively analyzed in order to evaluate the frequency in which these LLL might not be secondary (either completely or partially) but primary in origin.MethodsLymphoscintigraphies performed in 33 patients who underwent LN dissection (limited to the intra-abdominal LN) with or without radiotherapy for histologically confirmed ovarian cancer (n = 6), uterine cancer (n = 14 with cervical cancer and n = 7 with endometrial cancer), or prostate cancer (n = 6) were compared to lymphoscintigraphies obtained in primary LLL.ResultsIn 12 (33% of the) patients (3 men plus 9 women, 4 with cervical cancer and 5 with endometrial cancer), scintigraphy of the lower limbs revealed lympho-nodal presentation that did not match with the expected consequences of the surgical and/or radiological treatments and were either suggestive or typical of primary lymphedema.ConclusionsThis retrospective analysis of a limited but well-defined series of patients suggests that the appearance of LLL might not be related to cancer treatment(s) but that these LLL may represent the development of a primary lymphatic disease latent prior to the therapeutic interventions.

The lymphoscintigraphic investigation (LySc) of the superficial lymphatic system (SLS) remains the gold standard for the diagnosis of lower limb lymphoedema. However, LySc of the deep lymphatic system (DLS) may be useful for diagnosing deep lymphatic system insufficiency in patients with lower limb oedema (LLE) but normal and/or paradoxical LySc of the SLS. The purpose of this study was therefore to evaluate a new LySc of the deep lymphatic system in patients presenting with a normal and/or paradoxical SLS exam showing LLE. In all, 15 patients with unilateral and 17 with bilateral LLE underwent 3-phased deep LySc of the lower limb via the injection of 99 mTc-labelled human serum albumin (HSA) nanocolloids in the Kager’s triangle. The absence of popliteal lymphatic node visualization after phase 2 of DLS LySc to diagnose a deep lymphatic insufficiency has a specificity and a sensitivity of 89% in patients with unilateral LLE and without associated venous symptoms. An insufficiency of the DLS was observed in 67% of cases with unilateral LLE and 59% of patients with bilateral LLE of venous and/or lymphatic origin. In conclusion, the lymphoscintigraphic visualization of the popliteal lymphatic nodes after the injection of 99 mTc-labelled HSA nanocolloids in the Kager’s triangle seems to be an effective way to diagnose DLS insufficiency in patients with LLE but normal findings in the SLS.

Background: Axillary web syndrome (AWS) is a frequent complication after surgery for breast cancer, but its lymphatic involvement is not definitively established. Here we report the results of lymphoscintigraphic investigations in patients with AWS. Methods and Results: We conducted a retrospective, single-center review of lymphoscintigraphic investigations performed in 46 patients with AWS that was either clinically obvious or suspected. Of this group, 23 patients had two investigations with a mean interval of 19 weeks between them (range, 6–98 weeks). Results of the lymphoscintigraphic investigations, which were performed according to a well-standardized protocol, were classified into four patterns: normal; functional lymphatic insufficiency only (no lymphatic vascular morphologic abnormality); lymphovascular blockade without collateralization; and vascular collateralization and/or dermal backflow. Of the 46 patients, on the first lymphoscintigraphic investigation, four (8.6%) had a normal pattern, seven (15.2%) had functional lymphatic insufficiency only, four (8.6%) had lymphovascular blockade without collateralization, and 31 (67.3%) had vascular collateralization and/or dermal backflow. Among patients who underwent two investigations, four of the five who had only functional lymphatic insufficiency at the first investigation had developed vascular collateralization and/or dermal backflow by the second. The three patients who had lymphovascular blockade without collateralization at the first examination had also progressed to collateralization and/or dermal backflow at the second. None of the 15 patients who initially had vascular collateralization and/or dermal backflow showed any reversal at the second examination. Conclusions: Our analysis confirms the lymphatic nature of AWS and shows the lymphoscintigraphic patterns and evolutions of the lymphatic lesions with potential therapeutic implications. The retrospective review of our database is approved by the institutional ethics committee under number 2048.