<link rel="stylesheet" href="styles.f3b1fba60ec7970c.css">

Artificial intelligence in lymphedema: A systematic review of diagnostic and clinical applications

dc.contributor.authorBuyuker, Ceyda
dc.contributor.authorOzmen, Berk B.
dc.contributor.authorMorkuzu, Suat
dc.contributor.authorKaya, Mehmet Alper
dc.contributor.authorAksakal, Boran
dc.contributor.authorDjohan, Risal S.
dc.contributor.authorSchwarz, Graham S.
dc.date.accessioned2026-11-05T11:08:56Z
dc.date.issued2026
dc.description.abstractBackground: Lymphedema is a chronic, progressive condition characterized by impaired lymphatic drainage and fluid accumulation. Conventional diagnostic and monitoring tools remain operator-dependent or insensitive to early disease. Artificial intelligence (AI) offers opportunities to address these limitations through multimodal data integration and automated, reproducible analysis. Methods: This systematic review followed the PRISMA guidelines and was registered in PROSPERO (CRD420251133232). PubMed and Google Scholar were searched for clinical studies published between January 2015 and July 2025 by applying AI to lymphedema diagnosis, risk prediction, monitoring, or surgical planning. Data extraction included study design, population, methodology, predictors, and performance metrics. Risk of bias was assessed using PROBAST and QUADAS-2. Results: Eighteen studies involving 8720 patients were included. Applications covered risk prediction, imaging-based diagnosis, volumetric assessment, and clinical decision support. Reported performance ranged as follows: AUC, 0.80-0.99 and accuracy, 77-98%. Machine learning models integrating demographic and clinical data achieved AUCs up to 0.89, whereas deep learning models applied to ultrasound, CT, MRI, and clinical photographs achieved diagnostic accuracies up to 98%. Volumetric tools using dual-camera or 3D imaging correlated strongly with gold-standard water displacement (R = 0.99). External validation was absent and methodological heterogeneity was substantial. Conclusion: AI in lymphedema shows promise for early detection, risk stratification, and longitudinal monitoring; however, current evidence remains preliminary. Larger, multi-institutional validation studies are essential to confirm generalizability and demonstrate clinical utility. (c) 2026 British Association of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights are reserved, including those for text and data mining, AI training, and similar technologies.
dc.description.pages175-189
dc.description.volume117
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.bjps.2025.12.035
dc.identifier.issn1748-6815
dc.identifier.issn1878-0539
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjps.2025.12.035
dc.identifier.urihttps://openaccess.acibadem.edu.tr/handle/11443/11585
dc.identifier.wosWOS:001762085700001
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherELSEVIER SCI LTD
dc.relation.hasversion10.1016/j.bjps.2025.12.035
dc.relation.ispartofJOURNAL OF PLASTIC RECONSTRUCTIVE AND AESTHETIC SURGERY
dc.subjectLymphedema
dc.subjectArtificial intelligence
dc.subjectMachine learning
dc.subjectDeep learning
dc.subjectDiagnosis
dc.subjectImaging
dc.subjectACCURACY
dc.subjectSurgery
dc.titleArtificial intelligence in lymphedema: A systematic review of diagnostic and clinical applications
dc.typeReview
oaire.citation.editionScience Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED)
oaire.citation.endPage189
oaire.citation.startPage175
oaire.citation.volume117
person.identifier.ridNGR-7732-2025
person.identifier.ridAAQ-8752-2021
person.identifier.ridKIG-1060-2024

Files

Collections