ArticleJPRAS open2024
A feasibility study assessing quantitative indocyanine green angiographic predictors of reconstructive complications following nipple-sparing mastectomy.
Article in JPRAS open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Artificial Intelligence-predicted Outcomes of Breast Reconstruction: Progress, Pitfalls, and Path Forward.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2026Article
- Article
- Microsurgical Strategies in Post-Radiation and Revision Breast Reconstruction: Optimizing Outcomes in High-Risk Patients.Cancers · 2025Review
- Artificial Intelligence in Microsurgical Planning: A Five-Year Leap in Clinical Translation.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Immediate post-mastectomy breast reconstruction offers benefits; however, complications can compromise outcomes. Intraoperative indocyanine green fluorescence angiography (ICGFA) may mitigate perfusion-related complications (PRC); however, its interpretation remains subjective. Here, we examine and develop methods for ICGFA quantification, including machine learning (ML) algorithms for predicting complications. Methods: ICGFA video recordings of flap perfusion from a previous study of patients undergoing nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) with either immediate or staged immediate (delayed by a week due to perfusion insufficiency) reconstructions were analysed. Fluorescence intensity time series data were extracted, and perfusion parameters were interrogated for overall/regional associations with postoperative PRC. A naïve Bayes ML model was subsequently trained on a balanced data subset to predict PRC from the extracted meta-data. Results: The analysable video dataset of 157 ICGFA featured females (average age 48 years) having oncological/risk-reducing NSM with either immediate (n=90) or staged immediate (n=26) reconstruction. For those delayed, peak brightness at initial ICGFA was lower (p<0.001) and significantly improved (both quicker-onset and brighter p=0.001) one week later. The overall PRC rate in reconstructed patients (n=116) was 11.2%, with such patients demonstrating significantly dimmer (overall, p=0.018, centrally, p=0.03, and medially, p=0.04) and slower-onset (p=0.039) fluorescent peaks with shallower slopes (p=0.012) than uncomplicated patients with ICGFA. Importantly, such relevant parameters were converted into a whole field of view heatmap potentially suitable for intraoperative display. ML predicted PRC with 84.6% sensitivity and 76.9% specificity. Conclusion: Whole breast quantitative ICGFA assessment reveals statistical associations with PRC that are potentially exploitable via ML.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.