Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34347221›Full record

ArticleAnnals of surgical oncology2021

The Impact of Temporal Variation in Indocyanine Green Administration on Tumor Identification During Fluorescence Guided Breast Surgery.

Martha S Kedrzycki, Maria Leiloglou, Vadzim Chalau, Nicolas Chiarini, Paul T R Thiruchelvam, Dimitri J Hadjiminas, Katy R Hogben, Faiza Rashid, Rathi Ramakrishnan, Ara W Darzi and 2 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of surgical oncology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 21% of its field
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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Martha S Kedrzycki *Hamlyn Centre, Institute of Global Health Innovation, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Maria Leiloglou *Hamlyn Centre, Institute of Global Health Innovation, Imperial College London, London, UK. maria.leiloglou16@imperial.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0323-7612
Vadzim ChalauHamlyn Centre, Institute of Global Health Innovation, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Nicolas ChiariniDepartment of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Paul T R ThiruchelvamDepartment of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Dimitri J HadjiminasDepartment of Breast Surgery, Charing Cross Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK.
Katy R HogbenDepartment of Breast Surgery, Charing Cross Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK.
Faiza RashidDepartment of Histopathology, Charing Cross Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK.
Rathi RamakrishnanDepartment of Histopathology, Charing Cross Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK.
Ara W DarziHamlyn Centre, Institute of Global Health Innovation, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Daniel S ElsonHamlyn Centre, Institute of Global Health Innovation, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Daniel R LeffHamlyn Centre, Institute of Global Health Innovation, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust · GBImperial College London · GB

Funding

Medical Research Council MC_PC_18050Wellcome Trust 208857/Z/17/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOn average, 21% of women in the USA treated with Breast Conserving Surgery (BCS) undergo a second operation because of close positive margins. Tumor identification with fluorescence imaging could improve positive margin rates through demarcating location, size, and invasiveness of tumors. We investigated the technique's diagnostic accuracy in detecting tumors during BCS using intravenous indocyanine green (ICG) and a custom-built fluorescence camera system.

methodsIn this single-center prospective clinical study, 40 recruited BCS patients were sub-categorized into two cohorts. In the first 'enhanced permeability and retention' (EPR) cohort, 0.25 mg/kg ICG was injected ~ 25 min prior to tumor excision, and in the second 'angiography' cohort, ~ 5 min prior to tumor excision. Subsequently, an in-house imaging system was used to image the tumor in situ prior to resection, ex vivo following resection, the resection bed, and during grossing in the histopathology laboratory to compare the technique's diagnostic accuracy between the cohorts.

resultsThe two cohorts were matched in patient and tumor characteristics. The majority of patients had invasive ductal carcinoma with concomitant ductal carcinoma in situ. Tumor-to-background ratio (TBR) in the angiography cohort was superior to the EPR cohort (TBR = 3.18 ± 1.74 vs 2.10 ± 0.92 respectively, p = 0.023). Tumor detection reached sensitivity and specificity scores of 0.82 and 0.93 for the angiography cohort and 0.66 and 0.90 for the EPR cohort, respectively (p = 0.1051 and p = 0.9099). DISCUSSION: ICG administration timing during the angiography phase compared with the EPR phase improved TBR and diagnostic accuracy. Future work will focus on image pattern analysis and adaptation of the camera system to targeting fluorophores specific to breast cancer.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsIndocyanine GreenFemaleHumansMargins of ExcisionMastectomy, SegmentalProspective StudiesIndocyanine Green

Identifiers

PMID34347221
PMCPMC8418597
OpenAlexW3187334616

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.