Why the study?
The clinical evidence for indocyanine green fluorescence angiography (ICG-FA) reducing anastomotic leakage remains inconclusive, and current evaluation methods rely on subjective visual assessment.
Does indocyanine green fluorescence angiography reduce the risk of anastomotic leakage in patients undergoing colorectal surgery?
Does indocyanine green fluorescence angiography reduce the risk of anastomotic leakage in patients undergoing colorectal surgery?
ICG-FA is a promising but currently subjective tool for assessing anastomotic perfusion in colorectal surgery, requiring further large-scale standardized trials to confirm its utility in preventing anastomotic leakage.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
ICG-FA may guide safer colorectal anastomoses by perfusion assessment; leaves open whether leakage rates decline in routine use.
Anastomotic leakage is one of the most dreaded complications of colorectal surgery and is strongly associated with tissue perfusion. Indocyanine green fluorescence angiography (ICG-FA) using indocyanine green and near-infrared systems is an innovative technique that allows the visualization of anastomotic perfusion. Based on this information on tissue perfusion status, surgeons will be able to clearly identify colorectal segments with good blood flow for safer colorectal anastomosis. The results of several clinical trials indicate that ICG-FA may reduce the risk of AL in colorectal resection; however, the level of evidence is not high, as several other studies have failed to demonstrate a reduction in the risk of AL. Several large-scale RCTs are currently underway, and their results will determine whether ICG-FA is, indeed, useful. The major limitation of the current ICG-FA evaluation method, however, is that it is subjective and based on visual assessment by the surgeon. To complement this, the utility of objective evaluation methods for fluorescence using quantitative parameters is being investigated. Promising results have been reported from several clinical trials, but all trials are preliminary owing to their small sample size and lack of standardized protocols for quantitative evaluation. Therefore, appropriately standardized, high-quality, large-scale studies are warranted.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Iwamoto et al. (2022) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: