Figure - PMC

Skip to main content

View full-text article in PMC

. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2015 Jun 30.

Published in final edited form as: Radiology. 2013 Oct 28;269(3):893–902. doi: 10.1148/radiol.13120145

Obstructed Lymphatic Flow Results (a): Lymphatic flow curves for a representative healthy volunteer (M, 31 yrs) with unilateral cuff steno-occlusion of lymphatic fluid (pressure=60 mmHg) and for a patient (F, 60 yrs) with Stage II lymphedema secondary to unilateral breast cancer mastectomy. In both; healthy subjects and patients, a delay in lymphatic arrival times on the affected side relative to unaffected side is observed. Additionally, multiple arrival times are found, consistent with multiple afferent vessels delivering lymphatic water to the node. (b) The ratio of lymphatic flow velocity in the unaffected arm to the affected arm was significantly higher (P<0.005; 1.24 ± 0.18) in the six impaired subjects compared to the lymphatic velocity ratio of the left-to-right arm of the healthy subjects shown in Figure 3 (0.9124 ± 0.08). ** P<0.005.

Obstructed Lymphatic Flow Results (a): Lymphatic flow curves for a representative healthy volunteer (M, 31 yrs) with unilateral cuff steno-occlusion of lymphatic fluid (pressure=60 mmHg) and for a patient (F, 60 yrs) with Stage II lymphedema secondary to unilateral breast cancer mastectomy. In both; healthy subjects and patients, a delay in lymphatic arrival times on the affected side relative to unaffected side is observed. Additionally, multiple arrival times are found, consistent with multiple afferent vessels delivering lymphatic water to the node. (b) The ratio of lymphatic flow velocity in the unaffected arm to the affected arm was significantly higher (P<0.005; 1.24 ± 0.18) in the six impaired subjects compared to the lymphatic velocity ratio of the left-to-right arm of the healthy subjects shown in Figure 3 (0.9124 ± 0.08). ** P<0.005.