










































American Journal Of Biomedical Science & Pharmaceutical Innovation 1 https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ajbspi 

 
 

 VOLUME Vol.05 Issue06 2025 

PAGE NO. 1-7 

 
 
 
 
 

Challenges in Developing a Qualitative Ultrasonographic 

Classification for Lipedema 
 

Prof. Markus L. Schneider 

Institute of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany 

 

Dr. Hossein R. Mirzaei 

Department of Medical Imaging, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran 

 

 

Received: 03 April 2025; Accepted: 02 May 2025; Published: 01 June 2025 

 

Abstract: Lipedema, a chronic and progressive adipose tissue disorder, is characterized by disproportionate fat 
accumulation, primarily in the lower extremities, often leading to pain, bruising, and mobility impairment. Despite 
its significant prevalence and impact on quality of life, diagnosis remains challenging, frequently relying on clinical 
examination and patient history. Ultrasonography holds promise as a non-invasive diagnostic tool, offering 
insights into subcutaneous tissue characteristics. However, developing a standardized qualitative 
ultrasonographic classification for lipedema presents considerable challenges due to the heterogeneous nature 
of fat tissue, variability in disease presentation, and the subjective interpretation inherent in qualitative 
assessments. This article reviews the current diagnostic landscape of lipedema, explores the potential and 
limitations of ultrasonography, and critically examines the complexities involved in establishing a robust 
qualitative ultrasonographic classification. By outlining these challenges, we aim to guide future research towards 
more objective and standardized imaging criteria, ultimately improving the accuracy and consistency of lipedema 
diagnosis. 

 

Keywords: Lipedema, Ultrasonography, Qualitative Classification, Diagnosis, Adipose Tissue, Chronic Disease, 
Diagnostic Imaging. 

 

Introduction: Lipedema is a chronic, progressive 
disorder of adipose tissue, predominantly affecting 
women, characterized by a disproportionate 
accumulation of fat, typically in the lower extremities, 
from the hips to the ankles, while sparing the feet [2, 
3]. This condition is often misdiagnosed as general 
obesity or lymphedema, leading to delayed or 
inappropriate treatment [2, 5]. Patients with lipedema 
frequently experience pain, tenderness, easy bruising, 
and impaired mobility, significantly impacting their 
quality of life [2, 8]. The prevalence of lipedema is 
substantial, with recent studies in Brazil indicating its 
significant presence and associated risk factors [1]. 
Despite its widespread occurrence and debilitating 
symptoms, lipedema remains under-recognized and 
under-diagnosed globally, highlighting a critical unmet 
need in clinical practice [7, 8]. 

The diagnosis of lipedema primarily relies on clinical 
criteria, including specific fat distribution patterns, pain 
upon palpation, easy bruising, and the absence of 
pitting edema in the affected areas [3, 8]. However, the 
subjective nature of these clinical assessments can lead 
to diagnostic inconsistencies and delays. Objective 
diagnostic tools are urgently needed to provide a more 
definitive and standardized approach to identification. 

Diagnostic medical imaging plays a crucial role in 
modern medicine, offering valuable insights into 
disease pathology [10]. Ultrasonography, in particular, 
is a non-invasive, cost-effective, and readily available 
imaging modality that has shown potential in 
differentiating lipedema from other conditions like 
obesity and lymphedema by visualizing subcutaneous 
tissue characteristics [9]. Early research suggests that 
specific ultrasound criteria, such as increased 

 



American Journal of Applied Science and Technology 2 https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ajast 

American Journal of Applied Science and Technology (ISSN: 2771-2745) 
 

 

subcutaneous fat thickness, altered echogenicity, and 
the presence of characteristic "snowstorm" or 
"cobblestone" patterns, may aid in lipedema diagnosis 
[9]. 

However, the development of a standardized and 
widely accepted qualitative ultrasonographic 
classification for lipedema presents significant 
challenges. The inherent variability in fat tissue 
composition, the progressive nature of lipedema with 
different stages, and the subjective interpretation of 
qualitative ultrasound features contribute to these 
complexities. This article aims to explore these 
challenges in detail, reviewing the current state of 
lipedema diagnosis, the promise and limitations of 
ultrasonography, and the specific hurdles in 
establishing a robust qualitative ultrasonographic 
classification. By dissecting these issues, we hope to 
contribute to a clearer understanding of the path 
forward for improving diagnostic accuracy in lipedema. 

Literature Review 

Lipedema is a complex and often misunderstood 
condition, distinct from general obesity and 
lymphedema, yet frequently confounded with them [2, 
5]. The lack of a definitive diagnostic test contributes 
significantly to diagnostic delays and misdiagnosis, 
impacting patient care [8]. 

2.1. Clinical Diagnosis and Differential Diagnosis: 

The current standard of care for lipedema in the United 
States and other regions relies heavily on clinical 
examination [3, 8]. Key diagnostic features include: 

• Symmetrical, disproportionate fat 
accumulation: Primarily affecting the legs (from hips to 
ankles) and sometimes the arms, with a sharp 
demarcation at the wrists and ankles, sparing the hands 
and feet [2, 3]. 

• Pain and Tenderness: Affected adipose tissue is 
often painful to touch and can bruise easily [2, 8]. 

• Negative Stemmer's Sign: The skin at the base 
of the toes cannot be pinched and lifted, which is 
typically positive in lymphedema [3]. 

• Absence of Pitting Edema: In the early stages, 
although secondary lymphedema can develop in later 
stages [6]. 

Differentiating lipedema from obesity is crucial, as 
lipedema fat is resistant to diet and exercise [2]. While 
obesity can affect lymphatic function [4], lipedema is a 
distinct pathological entity. Distinguishing it from 
lymphedema, which involves lymphatic fluid 
accumulation, is also vital for appropriate management 
[6]. 

2.2. Role of Medical Imaging in Lipedema: 

Given the diagnostic challenges, medical imaging has 
been explored as a potential objective tool. Various 
imaging modalities have been investigated: 

• Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI): Can 
provide detailed anatomical information about fat 
distribution and may show characteristic patterns in 
lipedema fat, but it is expensive and not always readily 
available [2]. 

• Computed Tomography (CT): Also provides 
detailed cross-sectional images but involves radiation 
exposure, making it less suitable for routine diagnosis 
[10, 11]. 

• Lymphoscintigraphy: Useful for assessing 
lymphatic function and differentiating lipedema from 
primary or secondary lymphedema, but it is an invasive 
procedure [4]. 

• Dual-energy X-ray Absorptiometry (DXA): Can 
quantify body composition and fat distribution but 
does not provide detailed tissue characteristics. 

2.3. Ultrasonography in Lipedema Diagnosis: 

Ultrasonography is a non-invasive, radiation-free [FDA, 
Cleveland Clinic, American Cancer Society], and 
relatively inexpensive imaging technique that has 
emerged as a promising tool for visualizing 
subcutaneous tissue in lipedema [9]. Amato et al. 
(2021) specifically proposed ultrasound criteria for 
lipedema diagnosis, highlighting several key features 
[9]: 

• Increased Subcutaneous Fat Thickness: 
Particularly in affected areas compared to unaffected 
areas or control subjects. 

• Altered Echogenicity: Lipedema fat may exhibit 
a more heterogeneous or "snowstorm" appearance 
compared to normal fat, due to underlying fibrosis or 
edema [9]. 

• "Cobblestone" Pattern: Some studies describe 
a characteristic "cobblestone" pattern, possibly related 
to septal thickening or nodular fat lobules [9]. 

• Dilated Blood Vessels/Lymphatics: Though less 
consistently reported, some observations suggest 
dilated vessels within the lipedema fat. 

• Absence of Dermal Thickening: Helping to 
differentiate from lymphedema. 

2.4. Challenges in Qualitative Ultrasonographic 
Classification: 

Despite these promising features, developing a 
standardized qualitative ultrasonographic classification 
for lipedema faces significant hurdles: 

• Subjectivity of Qualitative Descriptors: Terms 
like "snowstorm" or "cobblestone" are subjective and 



American Journal of Applied Science and Technology 3 https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ajast 

American Journal of Applied Science and Technology (ISSN: 2771-2745) 
 

 

can be open to varied interpretation among different 
sonographers or clinicians [9]. This inter-observer 
variability can reduce diagnostic consistency. 

• Heterogeneity of Lipedema Fat: Lipedema is a 
progressive disease, and the structural characteristics 
of the adipose tissue can vary depending on the stage 
and individual patient. Early-stage lipedema might 
show subtle changes, while later stages might exhibit 
more pronounced fibrosis or nodularity, making a 
single, fixed qualitative classification difficult [2, 3]. 

• Overlap with Other Conditions: While 
ultrasound can help differentiate, there can still be 
some overlap in qualitative appearances between 
lipedema, obesity (especially morbid obesity [4]), and 
secondary lymphedema, particularly in advanced 
stages [6]. 

• Dependence on Equipment and Operator Skill: 
The quality of ultrasound images and their 
interpretation depend heavily on the ultrasound 
machine's resolution and the sonographer's experience 
and skill [10]. 

• Lack of Standardized Protocols: There is 
currently no widely accepted standardized protocol for 
performing ultrasound examinations specifically for 
lipedema, including parameters like probe frequency, 
depth settings, or measurement points [9]. This lack of 
standardization makes comparative studies and 
universal classification difficult. 

These challenges underscore the complexity of moving 
from promising observations to a reliable, universally 
accepted qualitative ultrasonographic classification for 
lipedema. 

METHODOLOGY 

(This section will outline a hypothetical methodological 
approach that researchers might undertake to address 
the challenges of developing a qualitative 
ultrasonographic classification for lipedema. It will not 
describe an actual experiment, but rather propose a 
robust study design.) 

To address the challenges in developing a qualitative 
ultrasonographic classification for lipedema, a multi-
center, prospective, observational study with a focus 
on inter-rater reliability and correlation with clinical 
staging would be crucial. 

3.1. Study Design and Participants: 

• Design: A prospective, observational study 
with a cross-sectional component for initial 
classification and a longitudinal component for tracking 
disease progression and classification stability. 

• Participants: A large cohort of female patients 
(N=500-1000) diagnosed with lipedema based on 

established clinical criteria (e.g., S2K Guideline 
Lipedema [3], Standard of Care for Lipedema in the 
United States [8]). A control group of age- and BMI-
matched healthy women, and groups with general 
obesity and secondary lymphedema, would also be 
included for differential diagnosis comparison. 
Participants would be recruited from multiple 
specialized lipedema clinics to ensure diverse disease 
presentations. 

3.2. Data Collection: 

• Clinical Data: Comprehensive clinical data 
would be collected for all participants, including: 

o Detailed medical history and physical 
examination findings specific to lipedema (pain, 
bruising, fat distribution, Stemmer's sign). 

o Clinical staging of lipedema (e.g., Stages I-
III/IV). 

o Anthropometric measurements (BMI, limb 
circumferences, volume measurements). 

o Quality of life assessments. 

• Ultrasonography Data: 

o Standardized Protocol Development: A 
rigorous, standardized ultrasound protocol would be 
developed collaboratively by expert sonographers and 
lipedema specialists. This protocol would specify: 

o Ultrasound machine settings (e.g., probe frequency 
(e.g., 7-15 MHz linear array), depth, gain). 

o Specific anatomical landmarks and measurement 
points (e.g., thigh, calf, arm at defined intervals). 

o Standardized image acquisition techniques (e.g., 
consistent pressure, perpendicular probe 
orientation). 

o Image Acquisition: Two independent, 
experienced sonographers, blinded to clinical 
diagnosis, would perform ultrasound examinations on 
each participant using the standardized protocol. 

o Image Parameters for Qualitative 
Classification: Images would be acquired to evaluate: 

• Subcutaneous Fat Thickness: Objective 
measurement at standardized points. 

• Echogenicity Patterns: Qualitative descriptions of 
fat echogenicity (e.g., homogeneous, 
heterogeneous, "snowstorm," "cobblestone," 
presence of fluid pockets, fibrosis). High-resolution 
images of various tissue layers would be captured. 

• Presence and Characteristics of Septa/Nodules: 
Qualitative description of fibrous septa, fat lobules, 
and nodular formations. 

• Vascularity/Lymphatics: Presence of dilated vessels 



American Journal of Applied Science and Technology 4 https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ajast 

American Journal of Applied Science and Technology (ISSN: 2771-2745) 
 

 

or lymphatics within the fat layer. 

• Digital Image Archiving: All ultrasound images 
and clips would be digitally archived for subsequent 
independent qualitative analysis. 

3.3. Data Analysis: 

• Qualitative Classification Development: 

o A panel of expert sonographers and lipedema 
specialists (blinded to patient clinical details) would 
independently review a large, diverse set of ultrasound 
images. 

o They would use a consensus-building process 
to develop a preliminary qualitative classification 
system based on reproducible visual patterns. This 
might involve iterative discussions and refinement 
based on initial inter-rater agreement assessments. 

o The classification would aim to describe 
distinct patterns (e.g., "fine granular," "coarse 
granular," "nodular," "fibrotic") and their potential 
correlation with disease stage. 

• Inter-Rater Reliability: The developed 
qualitative classification system would be applied by 
multiple independent, blinded expert raters to a subset 
of the archived ultrasound images. Kappa statistics and 
intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) would be used 
to assess inter-rater agreement on the qualitative 
descriptors and proposed classification categories. 

• Correlation with Clinical Staging: The finalized 
qualitative ultrasonographic classifications would be 
correlated with the established clinical stages of 
lipedema using appropriate statistical methods (e.g., 
Chi-square, regression analysis). The aim is to 
determine if specific qualitative ultrasound patterns 
are consistently associated with particular clinical 
stages. 

• Differential Diagnosis Efficacy: Ultrasound 
findings from lipedema patients would be compared 
with those from obesity and lymphedema control 
groups to identify unique qualitative features that aid 
in differential diagnosis. 

3.4. Ethical Considerations: 

Ethical approval would be obtained from all 
participating institutional review boards. Informed 
consent would be secured from all participants, 
ensuring confidentiality and voluntary participation. 
Given that ultrasound imaging does not involve ionizing 
radiation, the risks associated with the imaging 
procedure itself are minimal [FDA, Cleveland Clinic, 

American Cancer Society]. However, the ethical 
implications of using imaging for non-medical reasons 
or by untrained users would be considered in the 
broader context [Cleveland Clinic]. 

RESULTS 

(This section presents hypothetical results based on the 
common findings and challenges encountered in 
developing qualitative classifications for complex 
medical conditions, particularly in imaging.) 

The hypothetical study designed to develop and 
validate a qualitative ultrasonographic classification for 
lipedema would likely yield the following results, 
highlighting both potential and persistent challenges: 

Stages and features of lipedema. (a) to (f): Front and 
back pictures of women with lipedema Stages 1 to 3. 
Staging references the legs, however women pictured 
also have arm involvement. Stage 1 skin has a smooth 
texture with subdermal pebblelike feel due to 
underlying loose connective tissue fibrosis. Lipedema 
Stage 2 women have more lipedema tissue than 
women with Stage 1 and skin dimpling due to 
progressed fibrotic changes and excess tissue. Palpable 
nodules may be more numerous and larger. Note the 
full Achilles sulci in pictures (d) to (f). In Lipedema Stage 
2 arms, the tissue begins to hang off the arm and full 
arm involvement shows a more pronounced wrist cuff. 
Lipedema Stage 3 features increased lipedema tissue 
more fibrotic in texture with numerous large 
subdermal nodules and overhanding lobules of tissue. 
Patient (e) and (f) has lipedema, non-lipedema obesity 
and lipolymphedema. Types I to V describe the 
locations of lipedema tissue. Type I, lipedema tissue is 
present under the umbilicus and over hips and 
buttocks, Type II, under the umbilicus to knees (a, b), 
Type III, under the umbilicus to ankles (c to f), Type IV, 
arms (a to f) and Type V, lower legs (not shown). A 
tissue cuff at the ankle or wrist may be present in all 
stages. (g): Lipedema tissue overhangs the elbow. (h): 
Lipedema tissue often hangs well below the arm due to 
loss of elasticity and heaviness of the tissue. (i): Livedo 
reticularis is often a feature of lipedema. (j): Close view 
of tissue filling the Achilles sulci. (k): Close view of a 
column type lipedema leg with an obvious ankle cuff. 
(l): An ankle of a woman with lipedema without an 
ankle cuff (compare to (k)). (m): Pronation of the ankle 
commonly found in women with lipedema. Consent 
was obtained for use of all photos. LCT: loose 
connective tissue. 



American Journal of Applied Science and Technology 5 https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ajast 

American Journal of Applied Science and Technology (ISSN: 2771-2745) 
 

 

4.1. Identification of Common Ultrasonographic 
Features in Lipedema: 

The initial image review by expert sonographers would 
confirm the presence of several recurring qualitative 
features in lipedema adipose tissue, consistent with 
previous observations: 

• Increased Subcutaneous Fat Thickness: 
Quantifiable measurements would show significantly 
greater fat thickness in affected limbs of lipedema 
patients compared to control groups, particularly at 
specific anatomical sites (e.g., inner thigh, medial calf). 

• Heterogeneous Echogenicity: A highly 
prevalent finding would be the heterogeneous 
appearance of subcutaneous fat, varying from a 
"snowstorm" or "ground glass" texture in some areas, 
potentially indicative of edema within the fat, to more 
areas of increased echogenicity suggesting fibrosis. 

• "Cobblestone" Pattern: This characteristic 
pattern, representing enlarged fat lobules separated by 
thickened septa, would be identifiable in a considerable 
subset of lipedema patients, particularly in more 
advanced stages. 

• Presence of Nodules: Palpable nodules would 
correlate with distinct hyperechoic structures within 
the fat layer, often with irregular shapes. 

• Dilated Lymphatics/Vessels: While less 
consistently visualized, some images would show 
evidence of dilated lymphatic vessels or small blood 
vessels within the subcutaneous fat, possibly due to 
underlying inflammation or lymphatic dysfunction. 

4.2. Challenges in Qualitative Classification 
Development: 

Despite identifying common features, the process of 
developing a qualitative classification based on these 
features would face significant hurdles: 

• Inter-Rater Variability in Qualitative 
Descriptors: When multiple independent raters apply 
subjective terms like "snowstorm" or "cobblestone" to 
the same images, inter-rater reliability (Kappa 
coefficients) would be only moderate (e.g., Kappa = 0.4-
0.6), indicating a lack of strong consensus in subjective 
interpretation. This highlights the inherent ambiguity 
of purely qualitative descriptions. 

• Continuum vs. Discrete Categories: The 
observed ultrasonographic changes often exist along a 
continuum rather than falling into clear, discrete 
categories. Early-stage lipedema might show subtle 
heterogeneity, gradually progressing to more 
pronounced fibrosis and nodularity. Attempting to 
force these continuous changes into a few distinct 
qualitative stages would prove challenging, leading to 
boundary disputes among raters. 

• Overlap with Other Conditions: While 
quantitative fat thickness might differ, the qualitative 
appearance of fat in some lipedema patients (especially 
those with secondary lymphedema or severe obesity) 
could still overlap with the appearance of fat in control 
groups or those with other conditions, making 
definitive qualitative differentiation difficult. For 
instance, severe obesity can also present with 
heterogeneous fat patterns. 



American Journal of Applied Science and Technology 6 https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ajast 

American Journal of Applied Science and Technology (ISSN: 2771-2745) 
 

 

• Influence of Probe Pressure and Technique: 
Despite a standardized protocol, subtle variations in 
probe pressure during image acquisition could affect 
the perceived echogenicity and compressibility of the 
fat, influencing qualitative interpretation. 

4.3. Limited Correlation with Clinical Staging: 

The attempt to correlate proposed qualitative 
ultrasonographic categories with established clinical 
stages of lipedema would yield only moderate or weak 
associations. While patients with clinically advanced 
lipedema (Stage III/IV) might consistently exhibit more 
fibrotic or nodular patterns, and early-stage patients 
(Stage I) might show more subtle heterogeneity or 
"snowstorm" patterns, a clear, one-to-one 
correspondence for all stages would not be consistently 
evident. This indicates that a purely qualitative 
ultrasonographic classification might not fully capture 
the clinical heterogeneity of lipedema or may be too 
broad to accurately reflect subtle stage differences. 

In summary, while ultrasonography can identify several 
characteristic features of lipedema, the results suggest 
significant challenges in creating a robust and reliable 
qualitative ultrasonographic classification due to the 
subjective nature of visual interpretation and the 
heterogeneous presentation of the disease. 

DISCUSSION 

The findings from this hypothetical study highlight the 
persistent difficulties in developing a robust qualitative 
ultrasonographic classification for lipedema. While 
ultrasonography undeniably offers valuable insights 
into the subcutaneous adipose tissue characteristics in 
lipedema, and can distinguish it from normal fat and 
even obesity [9], translating these observations into 
universally reproducible qualitative categories remains 
a significant hurdle. 

The observed "inter-rater variability in qualitative 
descriptors" is a central challenge. Terms like 
"snowstorm" or "cobblestone" [9], while evocative, are 
inherently subjective. What one sonographer perceives 
as a distinct "cobblestone" pattern, another might 
interpret as generalized heterogeneity. This lack of 
precise, objective definitions leads to inconsistencies in 
diagnosis and hinders the standardization needed for 
widespread clinical application and research. It 
reinforces the difficulty of achieving high reliability with 
purely qualitative assessments in medical imaging [10]. 
To mitigate this, future efforts must move towards 
more objective, quantifiable parameters, possibly 
incorporating texture analysis algorithms or advanced 
imaging techniques to characterize fat tissue. 

The "continuum vs. discrete categories" issue further 
complicates classification. Lipedema is a progressive 

disorder [2, 3], meaning its ultrasonographic 
appearance likely changes subtly over time and across 
different stages. Attempting to fit this dynamic 
spectrum into a limited number of static qualitative 
categories may oversimplify the disease's complexity 
and lead to misclassification. A more effective 
classification might require a continuous scoring 
system or a multi-parametric approach that considers 
not just the "pattern" but also the severity of changes 
and the presence of associated features (e.g., septal 
thickness, vascularity). 

The "overlap with other conditions," particularly severe 
obesity and secondary lymphedema, is another critical 
point. While ultrasound can help differentiate, the 
qualitative appearance of fat in these conditions might, 
at times, mimic certain lipedema features [4, 6]. This 
necessitates careful correlation with clinical 
examination and patient history, emphasizing that 
ultrasound is an adjunctive tool rather than a 
standalone diagnostic arbiter for lipedema. Future 
research should focus on identifying highly specific 
ultrasonographic "signatures" for lipedema that are 
truly unique to the condition and resistant to 
confounders. 

The "influence of probe pressure and technique" 
highlights the operator-dependent nature of 
ultrasound. Even with standardized protocols, subtle 
variations can affect image quality and interpretation. 
This underscores the need for extensive training and 
certification for sonographers involved in lipedema 
assessment to ensure consistency and accuracy. Efforts 
to reduce low-value imaging [11] also implicitly 
highlight the need for clear diagnostic utility and 
standardization. 

Ultimately, while qualitative ultrasonography offers 
promising avenues for lipedema diagnosis, its current 
limitations prevent the establishment of a robust, 
universally accepted classification. Moving forward, 
research should focus on: 

1. Developing Quantitative Ultrasound 
Parameters: Moving beyond subjective descriptors to 
measure specific parameters like fat lobule size, septal 
thickness, and tissue compressibility using advanced 
ultrasound modalities (e.g., elastography). 

2. Integrating Multi-parametric Analysis: 
Combining multiple qualitative and quantitative 
ultrasound features into a comprehensive scoring 
system rather than relying on a single qualitative 
pattern. 

3. Artificial Intelligence/Machine Learning: 
Utilizing AI algorithms to analyze ultrasound images for 
subtle patterns not easily discernible by the human 
eye, potentially leading to more objective and 



American Journal of Applied Science and Technology 7 https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ajast 

American Journal of Applied Science and Technology (ISSN: 2771-2745) 
 

 

consistent classifications. 

4. Longitudinal Studies: Tracking 
ultrasonographic changes over time in lipedema 
patients to better understand disease progression and 
refine stage-specific imaging criteria. 

By addressing these challenges, the field can progress 
towards a more objective, reliable, and clinically useful 
ultrasonographic classification for lipedema, ultimately 
facilitating earlier and more accurate diagnosis for 
millions of affected individuals. 

CONCLUSION 

The development of a standardized qualitative 
ultrasonographic classification for lipedema presents 
significant challenges stemming from the subjective 
nature of visual interpretation, the inherent 
heterogeneity and progressive nature of the disease, 
and potential overlaps with other conditions. While 
ultrasonography offers valuable, non-invasive insights 
into subcutaneous adipose tissue, the current 
qualitative descriptors lack the precision and 
reproducibility needed for a universal classification 
system. 

Despite these hurdles, the potential of ultrasound as a 
diagnostic adjunct for lipedema remains high. Future 
efforts must pivot towards more objective, quantitative 
ultrasonographic parameters, potentially leveraging 
advanced imaging techniques and artificial intelligence 
to overcome subjective biases. By striving for a robust 
and reliable imaging classification, the medical 
community can significantly improve the accuracy and 
consistency of lipedema diagnosis, ultimately leading 
to earlier intervention and better outcomes for 
affected patients. 

REFERENCES 

Amato, A.C.M., Amato, F.C.M., Amato, J.L.S. and 
Benitti, D.A. (2022) Prevalência e fatores de risco para 
lipedema no Brasil. Jornal Vascular Brasileiro, 21, 1-11. 
https://doi.org/10.1590/1677-5449.202101981  

Forner‐Cordero, I., Szolnoky, G., Forner‐Cordero, A. and 
Kemény, L. (2012) Lipedema: An Overview of Its Clinical 
Manifestations, Diagnosis and Treatment of the 
Disproportional Fatty Deposition Syndrome—
Systematic Review. Clinical Obesity, 2, 86-95. 
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1758-8111.2012.00045.x  

Faerber, G., Cornely, M., Daubert, C., Erbacher, G., Fink, 
J., Hirsch, T., et al. (2024) S2K Guideline Lipedema. 
JDDG: Journal der Deutschen Dermatologischen 
Gesellschaft, 22, 1303-1315. 
https://doi.org/10.1111/ddg.15513 

Greene, A.K. and Sudduth, C.L. (2020) Lower Extremity 
Lymphatic Function Predicted by Body Mass Index: A 
Lymphoscintigraphic Study of Obesity and Lipedema. 

International Journal of Obesity, 45, 369-373. 
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41366-020-00681-6  

Warren, A.G., Janz, B.A., Borud, L.J. and Slavin, S.A. 
(2007) Evaluation and Management of the Fat Leg 
Syndrome. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 119, 9e-
15e.  
https://doi.org/10.1097/01.prs.0000244909.82805.dc  

Esmer, M. and Schingale, F.J. (2024) Effect of Physical 
Therapy on Circumference Measurement and 
Extremity Volume in Patients Suffering from Lipedema 
with Secondary Lymphedema. Lymphatic Research and 
Biology, 22, 8-11. 
https://doi.org/10.1089/lrb.2023.0013  

Carballeira Braña, A. and Poveda Castillo, J. (2023) The 
Advanced Care Study: Current Status of Lipedema in 
Spain, a Descriptive Cross-Sectional Study. 
International Journal of Environmental Research and 
Public Health, 20, Article No. 6647. 
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20176647  

Herbst, K.L., Kahn, L.A., Iker, E., Ehrlich, C., Wright, T., 
McHutchison, L., et al. (2021) Standard of Care for 
Lipedema in the United States. Phlebology: The Journal 
of Venous Disease, 36, 779-796. 
https://doi.org/10.1177/02683555211015887  

[9] Amato, A.C.M., Saucedo, D.Z., Santos, K.d.S. and 
Benitti, D.A. (2021) Ultrasound Criteria for Lipedema 
Diagnosis. Phlebology: The Journal of Venous Disease, 
36, 651-658. 
https://doi.org/10.1177/02683555211002340  

Bradley, D. and Bradley, K.E. (2014) The Value of 
Diagnostic Medical Imaging. North Carolina Medical 
Journal, 75, 121-125. 
https://doi.org/10.18043/ncm.75.2.121  

Kjelle, E., Andersen, E.R., Soril, L.J.J., van Bodegom-Vos, 
L. and Hofmann, B.M. (2021) Interventions to Reduce 
Low-Value Imaging—A Systematic Review of 
Interventions and Outcomes. BMC Health Services 
Research, 21, Article No. 983. 
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-021-07004-z  

 

 

https://doi.org/10.1590/1677-5449.202101981
https://doi.org/10.1590/1677-5449.202101981
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1758-8111.2012.00045.x
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1758-8111.2012.00045.x
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41366-020-00681-6
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41366-020-00681-6
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41366-020-00681-6
https://doi.org/10.1097/01.prs.0000244909.82805.dc
https://doi.org/10.1097/01.prs.0000244909.82805.dc
https://doi.org/10.1089/lrb.2023.0013
https://doi.org/10.1089/lrb.2023.0013
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20176647
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20176647
https://doi.org/10.1177/02683555211015887
https://doi.org/10.1177/02683555211015887
https://doi.org/10.1177/02683555211002340
https://doi.org/10.1177/02683555211002340
https://doi.org/10.18043/ncm.75.2.121
https://doi.org/10.18043/ncm.75.2.121
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-021-07004-z
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-021-07004-z

