Table 2. Results of application of the taping technique.

Authors	Results
Finnerty et al. 7	Satisfactory lymphedema reduction results in 70% of patients.
Smykla et al. 8	Use of taping was not effective for reduction of lymphedema, suggesting that it could be used as a complementary technique to CP. The 24.45% reduction in edema was not significant in relation to the other groups.
Pekyavas et al. 9	Use of taping in conjunction with standard treatment produced more satisfactory results (p = 0.008), and increased the effect of treatment. There was no significant difference between the groups in terms of symptoms related to lymphedema or satisfaction with treatment.
Taradaj et al. 10	Taping may be a good option for patients who are resistant to or have contraindications against CP. A 22.45% reduction in limb volume (p = 0.000118) and 24.13% reduction of edema (p = 0.00041). Reduction not significant in relation to other groups.
Martins et al. 11	Increased upper limb functionality was observed with taping (p < 0.001), but there was no difference in limb volume (p = 0.638).
Pop et al. 12	A 55% reduction in the volume of the limb with edema was observed, with the spiral technique producing better results. The result was significant in relation to the conventional taping subset (55% vs. 27% - p < 0.001).
Do et al. 13	There were improvements in quality of life and functional capacity, in addition to a 79.5% reduction in edema volume.
Malicka et al. 14	Taping is effective for lymphedema in the initial stages (p = 0.0009) and could be a safe alternative to CP when it is contraindicated.
Taradaj et al. 15	Taping was effective for reduction of lymphedema (reduction of 627 cm3 ) in 3 weeks. Edema reduction can be accelerated using taping.