Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37745774›Full record

ArticleJournal of biomedical optics2023

Assessment of open-field fluorescence guided surgery systems: implementing a standardized method for characterization and comparison.

Marien I Ochoa, Alberto Ruiz, Ethan LaRochelle, Matthew Reed, Eren Berber, George Poultsides, Brian W Pogue

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of biomedical optics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
–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

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. A Wearable Fluorescence Imaging Device for Intraoperative Identification of Human Brain Tumors.IEEE journal of translational engineering in health and medicine · 2024
    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.

Marien I OchoaUniversity of Wisconsin Madison, Department of Medical Physics, Madison, Wisconsin, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-6427-4447
Alberto RuizQUEL Imaging, White River Junction, Vermont, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-0577-369X
Ethan LaRochelleQUEL Imaging, White River Junction, Vermont, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-7883-9987
Matthew ReedUniversity of Wisconsin Madison, Department of Medical Physics, Madison, Wisconsin, United States.ORCID 0009-0002-2134-5844
Eren BerberCleveland Clinic - Marymount Hospital, Garfield Heights, Ohio, United States.
George PoultsidesStanford Medicine, Department of Surgery, Stanford, California, United States.
Brian W PogueUniversity of Wisconsin Madison, Department of Medical Physics, Madison, Wisconsin, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-9887-670X

Funding

UW COMPREHENSIVE CANCER CENTER SUPPORTP30CA014520 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI Christian Capitini · 1985 to 2026
$142.6M
Small Molecule Enhancers of Photodynamic Therapy for Skin CancerP01CA084203 · NCI · MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL · PI Brian William Pogue · 2001 to 2026
$27.9M
Surrogate biomarkers for assessing changes in pancreatic cancer tumor microenvironmentR01EB032337 · NIBIB · UNIVERSITY OF ROCHESTER · PI DOYLEY, MARVIN M · 2021 to 2024
$2.4M
NCI NIH HHS P01 CA084203NCI NIH HHS P30 CA014520NIBIB NIH HHS R01 EB032337
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Significance: Fluorescence guided surgery (FGS) has demonstrated improvements in decision making and patient outcomes for a wide range of surgical procedures. Not only can FGS systems provide a higher level of structural perfusion accuracy in tissue reconstruction cases but they can also serve for real-time functional characterization. Multiple FGS devices have been Food and Drug administration (FDA) cleared for use in open and laparoscopic surgery. Despite the rapid growth of the field, there has been a lack standardization methods. Aim: This work overviews commonalities inherent to optical imaging methods that can be exploited to produce such a standardization procedure. Furthermore, a system evaluation pipeline is proposed and executed through the use of photo-stable indocyanine green fluorescence phantoms. Five different FDA-approved open-field FGS systems are used and evaluated with the proposed method. Approach: The proposed pipeline encompasses the following characterization: (1) imaging spatial resolution and sharpness, (2) sensitivity and linearity, (3) imaging depth into tissue, (4) imaging system DOF, (5) uniformity of illumination, (6) spatial distortion, (7) signal to background ratio, (8) excitation bands, and (9) illumination wavelength and power. Results: The results highlight how such a standardization approach can be successfully implemented for inter-system comparisons as well as how to better understand essential features within each FGS setup. Conclusions: Despite clinical use being the end goal, a robust yet simple standardization pipeline before clinical trials, such as the one presented herein, should benefit regulatory agencies, manufacturers, and end-users to better assess basic performance and improvements to be made in next generation FGS systems.

Indexed as

Surgery, Computer-AssistedHumansIndocyanine GreenLightingOptical ImagingPerfusionUnited StatesIndocyanine Greenfluorescence-guided-surgeryimagingopticsstandards

Identifiers

PMID37745774
PMCPMC10513724

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.