Trial reportSurgery today2011
Indocyanine green fluorescence monitoring of perineal wound contamination in abdominoperineal resection: a preliminary report.
Trial report in Surgery today, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Management of Perineal Wounds Following Pelvic Surgery.Clinics in colon and rectal surgery · 2022Review
- Risk factors for perineal wound infection after abdominoperineal resection of advanced lower rectal cancer.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2017Article
- Fluorescence imaging in surgery.IEEE reviews in biomedical engineering · 2013Review
- A review of indocyanine green fluorescent imaging in surgery.International journal of biomedical imaging · 2012Article
- Optical tecnology developments in biomedicine: history, current and future.Translational medicine @ UniSa · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeSurgical site infections (SSI) in an abdominoperineal resection (APR) occur more frequently than in other types of operations for patients with colorectal cancer. Perineal wounds are the most vulnerable sites, and they may be caused by stool contamination. Indocyanine green (ICG) fluorescence imaging, by which sensitive detection was possible, was used as a marker of perineal wound contamination.
methodIndocyanine green was transanally injected to the rectum before operation, and fluorescence images were obtained during the operation in three patients who underwent APR.
resultsOne subject, in whom gross contamination was not visible, had an SSI, and a trace of ICG fluorescence was detectable in the perianal skin. The other two subjects, in whom skin preparation was completely performed until ICG contamination was eliminated, were free from SSI.
conclusionsOur results suggested that a trace of stool contamination remained in the perineal skin field even after the usual antiseptic skin preparation. Furthermore, meticulous skin preparation is required to minimize stool contamination in APR patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.