Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35290507›Full record

ArticleSurgical endoscopy2022

Cost analysis of indocyanine green fluorescence angiography for prevention of anastomotic leakage in colorectal surgery.

Rachel Q Liu, Ahmad Elnahas, Ephraim Tang, Nawar A Alkhamesi, Jeffrey Hawel, Abdulaziz Alnumay, Christopher M Schlachta

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

27 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 38 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. Observational
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. How to objectively evaluate the impact of image-guided surgery technologies.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2024
    Review
  20. Article
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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Rachel Q LiuDepartment of Surgery, Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, Western University, London, Canada.
Ahmad ElnahasDepartment of Surgery, Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, Western University, London, Canada.
Ephraim TangDepartment of Surgery, Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, Western University, London, Canada.
Nawar A AlkhamesiDepartment of Surgery, Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, Western University, London, Canada.
Jeffrey HawelDepartment of Surgery, Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, Western University, London, Canada.
Abdulaziz AlnumayDepartment of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, McGill University, Montreal, Canada.
Christopher M SchlachtaDepartment of Surgery, Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, Western University, London, Canada. christopher.schlachta@lhsc.on.ca.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3685-2558
Western University · CAMcGill University · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIndocyanine green, near infrared, fluorescence angiography (ICG-FA) is increasingly adopted in colorectal surgery for intraoperative tissue perfusion assessment to reduce anastomotic leakage rates. However, the economic impact of this intervention has not been investigated. This study is a cost analysis of the routine use of ICG-FA in colorectal surgery from the hospital payer perspective.

methodsA decision analysis model was developed for colorectal resections considering two scenarios: resection without using ICG-FA and resection with intraoperative ICG-FA for anastomotic perfusion assessment. Incorporated into the model were the costs of ICG agent, fluorescence angiography equipment, surgery, anastomotic leak, and the leak rates with and without ICG-FA. All input data were derived from recent publications.

resultsThe routine use of ICG-FA for colorectal anastomosis is cost saving when cost analysis is performed using the following base case assumptions: 8.6% leak rate without ICG-FA, odds ratio of 0.46 for reduction of leakage with ICG-FA (4.8% leak rate relative to 8.6% base case), cost of ICG-FA of $250, and incremental cost of leak, not requiring reoperation, of $9,934.50. In one-way sensitivity analyses, routine use of ICG-FA was cost saving if the cost of an anastomotic leak is more than $5616.29, the cost of ICG-FA is less than $634.44, the leak rate (without ICG-FA) is higher than 4.9%, or the odds ratio for reduction of leak with ICG-FA is less than 0.69. There is a per-case saving of $192.22 with the use of ICG-FA.

conclusionUsing the best available evidence and most conservative base case values, routine use of ICG-FA in colorectal surgery was found to be cost saving. Since the evidence suggests there is a reduction in leak rate, the routine use of ICG-FA is a dominating strategy. However, the overall quality of evidence is low and there is a clear need for prospective, randomized controlled trials.

Indexed as

Colorectal NeoplasmsColorectal SurgeryAnastomosis, SurgicalAnastomotic LeakCosts and Cost AnalysisFluorescein AngiographyHumansIndocyanine GreenProspective StudiesIndocyanine GreenAnastomotic leakageColorectal anastomosisCost analysisIndocyanine green fluorescence angiography

Identifiers

PMID35290507
OpenAlexW4221120161

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.