Together, we can make the difference in Lymphedema!

Our Site Navigation

Home ] What is Lymphedema ] Diagnosing Lymphedema ] Breast/Chest/Truncal Lymphedema ] Axillary Web Syndrome-Cording ] Radiation-Induced Brachial Plexopathy ] Lymphedema Emergencies and Medical Care ] Reducing Your Risk of Lymphedema ] What we Want Our Healthcare Providers to Know About Lymphedema ] Essential information on Lymphedema for All Health Care Providers ] Finding a Qualified Lymphedema Therapist ] Treatment of Lymphedema ] Lymphedema Garments ] Proper Fitting of Sleeves and Gloves ] Personal Stories of Lymphedema ] How You Can Cope ] Resources ] Research Updates and Comments ] Search for Research ] Advocacy ] Appealing for Care ] FAQ'S ] History of Lymphedema ] Privacy Policy ] About Us ] Site Map ] Medical References ] Search Our Site ]

Treatment of Lymphedema Pages

Manual Lymphatic Drainage Massage
Wrapping/Bandaging
Sleeves.Gauntlets and Gloves
Breast Compression
Night Time Garments
Swell Spots, Foam Padding, Chip Bags
Skin and Nail Care
Exercise
Patient Education--Self-Management
Kinesio Taping
Compression Pumps
Breathing
Nutrition and Diet
Low Level Laser Therapy
Acuscope
Lymph Drainage Gas Ionization
Alternative Medicine
Other Unproven Modalities
Abyanga

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Alternatives to Standard Treatment of Lymphedema--Acuscope

Acuscope
There is no quick fix for lymphedema.  Unfortunately, there are untested medical devices out there promising this quick fix.  We have the emphatic opinion of "buyer beware."

For some of the same reasons that we do not endorse the Laser or endorse or recommend the Acuscope as any type of effective treatment of lymphedema, we are including it here for those who have questions about its use in lymphedema.

Again, we do not in any way endorse this treatment.

Again, the below study was performed on 26 women, which we do not believe creates any type of evidenced based study.

http://www.advbiomed.com/

Probably the best paper that has been published in a peer-reviewed journal about the Acuscope and its efficacy versus radiation-induced fibrosis is this:

Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 2002 Sep 1;54(1):23-34.  Pilot study of impedance-controlled microcurrent therapy for managing radiation-induced fibrosis in head-and-neck cancer patients.  Lennox AJ, Shafer JP, Hatcher M, Beil J, Funder SJ.

Fermilab Neutron Therapy Facility, Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory, PO Box 500, Mail Stop 301, Batavia, IL 60510, USA, alennox@fnal.gov

PURPOSE:  To evaluate the effectiveness of impedance-controlled microcurrent therapy for managing treatment sequelae in head-and-neck cancer patients.

METHODS AND MATERIALS: Between January 1998 and June 1999, 26 patients who were experiencing late effects of radiotherapy were treated b.i.d. with impedance-controlled microcurrent therapy for 1 week. Objective range-of-motion measurements were made for cervical rotation, extension/flexion, and lateral flexion before therapy, at the end of each treatment day, and monthly for 3 months. In addition, each patient's subjective complaints were tabulated before treatment and reevaluated at the last follow-up visit. No additional physical therapy or electrical stimulation was permitted during the follow-up period

RESULTS:  At the end of the course of microcurrent therapy, 92% of the 26 patients exhibited improved cervical rotation, 85% had improved cervical extension/flexion, and 81% had improved cervical lateral flexion. Twenty-two patients returned for the 3-month follow-up visit. Of these, 91% had maintained a cervical rotation range of motion greater than their pretherapy measurements. Eighty-two percent maintained improved cervical extension/flexion and 77% maintained improved lateral flexion. When the range-of-motion measurements were stratified by pretreatment severity (severe, moderate, mild, or asymptomatic), the degree of improvement directly correlated with the severity. Thus, patients who had more severe initial symptoms experienced a higher percentage of improvement than did those with milder symptoms. For these patients, the cervical rotation range of motion changed from a baseline of 59 degrees +/- 12 degrees to 83 degrees +/- 14 degrees at 3 months; flexion/extension improved from 47 degrees +/- 10 degrees to 73 degrees +/- 13 degrees; and lateral flexion went from 31 degrees +/- 7 degrees to 48 degrees +/- 9 degrees. Some patients also reported symptom improvement for tongue mobility, facial asymmetry, xerostomia, cervical/facial muscle spasms, trismus, and soft tissue tenderness. No adverse effects were observed.

CONCLUSION:  Impedance-controlled microcurrent therapy shows promise for remediation of range-of-motion limitations arising as late effects of radiotherapy for head-and-neck cancer.  Additional studies are needed to validate these preliminary results and to optimize the microcurrent treatment protocol, particularly with respect to treatment schedules and combining microcurrent therapy with physical and/or drug therapy.

 

Page Last Modified 09/29/2015

All medical information presented on this page is the opinion of our Editorial Board and Experts.  See our "About us"  and "Resources" pages.