Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37968920›Full record

SynthesisThe journal of histochemistry and cytochemistry : official journal of the Histochemistry Society2023

Accuracy of Ex-vivo Fluorescence Confocal Microscopy in Margin Assessment of Solid Tumors: A Systematic Review.

Matthew Au, Ricardo Almeida-Magana, Tarek Al-Hammouri, Aiman Haider, Greg Shaw

Open access · hybridAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The journal of histochemistry and cytochemistry : official journal of the Histochemistry Society, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
3.6field-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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Matthew AuDepartment of Targeted Intervention, University College London, London, United Kingdom, University College London Hospitals, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-4977-531X
Ricardo Almeida-MaganaDepartment of Targeted Intervention, University College London, London, United Kingdom, University College London Hospitals, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-3437-1649
Tarek Al-HammouriDepartment of Urology, University College London Hospitals, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-2377-0545
Aiman HaiderDepartment of Pathology, University College London Hospitals, London, United Kingdom.
Greg ShawDepartment of Targeted Intervention, University College London, London, United Kingdom, University College London Hospitals, London, United Kingdom.
Royal London Hospital · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Fluorescence confocal microscopy (FCM) is a novel technology that enables rapid high-resolution digital imaging of non-formalin-fixed tissue specimens and offers real-time positive surgical margin identification. In this systematic review, we evaluated the accuracy metrics of ex vivo FCM for intraoperative margin assessment of different tumor types. A systematic search of MEDLINE via PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, and Scopus was performed for relevant papers (PROSPERO ID: CRD42022372558). We included 14 studies evaluating four types of microscopes in six different tumor types, including breast, prostate, central nervous system, kidney, bladder, and conjunctival tumors. Using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies tool, we identified a high risk of bias in patient selection (21%) and index test (36%) of the included studies. Overall, we found that FCM has good accuracy metrics in all tumor types, with high sensitivity and specificity (>80%) and almost perfect concordance (>90%) against final pathology results. Despite these promising findings, the quality of the available evidence and bias concerns highlight the need for adequately designed studies to further define the role of ex vivo FCM in replacing the frozen section as the tool of choice for intraoperative margin assessment.

Indexed as

NeoplasmsHumansMaleMicroscopy, ConfocalMicroscopy, Fluorescencebrain neoplasmsbreast neoplasmsconfocal microscopymargins of excisionprostatic neoplasms

Identifiers

PMID37968920
PMCPMC10691410
OpenAlexW4388732629

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.