ReviewAsian journal of urology2025
The diagnostic performance of indocyanine green for the sentinel node biopsy in prostate cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in Asian journal of urology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cystoscopic ICG-Guided Sentinel Lymph Node Dissection in Robotic Radical Prostatectomy: A Prospective Study.The Prostate · 2026Article
- Magnetically Navigated and PSMA/STEAP1 Dual-Targeted Nanoliposomes for NIR-II/MRI Imaging with Photothermal-Chemo-Immunotherapy for Prostate Cancer.Research (Washington, D.C.) · 2026Article
- Advances in Techniques in Radical Prostatectomy.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Almost 15% of prostate cancer (PCa) patients were found to have lymph node metastases (LNMs), which are associated with higher risk of biochemical recurrence. Using indocyanine green (ICG) for the sentinel node biopsy (SNB) before surgery was proposed to detect LNMs in PCa patients. However, its diagnostic performance still remains controversial. This study aimed to investigate the diagnostic performance of ICG for the SNB in PCa. Methods: This systematic review and meta-analysis has been reported in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. The protocol has been registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews database, and the register number is CRD42023421911. Four bibliographic databases were searched, Results: A total of 17 articles from databases are enrolled in this study. Using lymph node-based data, our results showed that the pooled sensitivity and specificity of applying ICG alone in PCa were 71% (95% CI 52%-85%) and 68% (95% CI 64%-72%), respectively. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of applying ICG-technetium-99m-nanocolloid in PCa were 49% (95% CI 39%-59%) and 69% (95% CI 67%-71%), respectively. Conclusion: The efficacy of using ICG or ICG-technetium-99m-nanocolloid for the SNB in PCa is relatively unsatisfactory. ICG cannot yet substitute extended pelvic lymph node dissection for detecting LNMs accurately. More research or novel tracers are needed to achieve the goal of precise surgery.
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.