Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29484554›Full record

SynthesisSurgical endoscopy2018

Diagnostic evaluation of sentinel lymph node biopsy using indocyanine green and infrared or fluorescent imaging in gastric cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Daniel Skubleny, Jerry T Dang, Samuel Skulsky, Noah Switzer, Chunhong Tian, Xinzhe Shi, Christopher de Gara, Daniel W Birch, Shahzeer Karmali

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Surgical endoscopy, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers, 8 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed, 8 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

33 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Article
  12. Optical and Optoacoustic Imaging Probes.Recent results in cancer research. Fortschritte der Krebsforschung. Progres dans les recherches sur le cancer · 2026
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Daniel SkublenyDepartment of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, 2D, Walter C Mackenzie Health Sciences Centre, University of Alberta, 840-112 Street, Edmonton, T6G 2B7, Canada. skubleny@ualberta.ca.ORCID 0000-0001-8243-6139
Jerry T DangDepartment of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, 2D, Walter C Mackenzie Health Sciences Centre, University of Alberta, 840-112 Street, Edmonton, T6G 2B7, Canada.
Samuel SkulskyFaculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.
Noah SwitzerDepartment of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, 2D, Walter C Mackenzie Health Sciences Centre, University of Alberta, 840-112 Street, Edmonton, T6G 2B7, Canada.
Chunhong TianDepartment of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, 2D, Walter C Mackenzie Health Sciences Centre, University of Alberta, 840-112 Street, Edmonton, T6G 2B7, Canada.
Xinzhe ShiCentre for the Advancement of Minimally Invasive Surgery (CAMIS), Royal Alexandra Hospital, Edmonton, Canada.
Christopher de GaraDepartment of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, 2D, Walter C Mackenzie Health Sciences Centre, University of Alberta, 840-112 Street, Edmonton, T6G 2B7, Canada.
Daniel W BirchDepartment of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, 2D, Walter C Mackenzie Health Sciences Centre, University of Alberta, 840-112 Street, Edmonton, T6G 2B7, Canada.
Shahzeer KarmaliDepartment of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, 2D, Walter C Mackenzie Health Sciences Centre, University of Alberta, 840-112 Street, Edmonton, T6G 2B7, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSentinel node navigation surgery (SNNS) for gastric cancer using infrared visualization of indocyanine green (ICG) is intriguing because it may limit operative morbidity. We are the first to systematically review and perform meta-analysis on the diagnostic utility of ICG and infrared electronic endoscopy (IREE) or near infrared fluorescent imaging (NIFI) for SNNS exclusively in gastric cancer.

methodsA search of electronic databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, SCOPUS, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library using search terms "gastric/stomach" AND "tumor/carcinoma/cancer/neoplasm/adenocarcinoma/malignancy" AND "indocyanine green" was completed in May 2017. Articles were selected by two independent reviewers based on the following major inclusion criteria: (1) diagnostic accuracy study design; (2) indocyanine green was injected at tumor site; (3) IREE or NIFI was used for intraoperative visualization. 327 titles or abstracts were screened. The quality of included studies was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2.

resultsTen full text studies were selected. 643 patients were identified with the majority of patients possessing T1 tumors (79.8%). Pooled identification rate, diagnostic odds ratio, sensitivity, and specificity were 0.99 (0.97-1.0), 380.0 (68.71-2101), 0.87 (0.80-0.93), and 1.00 (0.99-1.00), respectively. The summary receiver operator characteristic for ICG + IREE/NIFI demonstrated a test accuracy of 98.3%. Subgroup analysis found improved test performance for studies with low-risk QUADAS-2 scores, studies published after 2010 and submucosal ICG injection. IREE had improved diagnostic odds ratio, sensitivity, and identification rate compared to NIFI. Heterogeneity among studies ranged from low (I

conclusionsWe found encouraging results regarding the accuracy, diagnostic odds ratio, and specificity of the test. The sensitivity was not optimal but may be improved by a strict protocol to augment the technique. Given the number and heterogeneity of studies, our results must be viewed with caution.

Indexed as

Fluorescent DyesIndocyanine GreenAdenocarcinomaEndoscopy, GastrointestinalGastrectomyHumansLymphatic MetastasisOdds RatioOptical ImagingOutcome Assessment, Health CareSensitivity and SpecificitySentinel Lymph NodeSentinel Lymph Node BiopsySpectroscopy, Near-InfraredStomach NeoplasmsFluorescent DyesIndocyanine GreenGastricIndocyanine greenInfraredNodeSentinel

Identifiers

PMID29484554

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.