ReviewCureus2025
Meta-Analysis of Image-Based Versus Probe-Based Parathyroid Near-Infrared Autofluorescence.
Review in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Factors influencing identification accuracy rate of parathyroid glands using near-infrared autofluorescence during endoscopic thyroidectomy.Surgery open science · 2026Article
- A Simple Technique for Probe-Based NIRAF-Guided Parathyroid Identification in TOETVA.The Laryngoscope · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Proper identification of parathyroid tissue is a critical component in surgery involving the thyroid and parathyroid gland (PG). In recent years, near infrared autofluorescence (NIRAF) has been investigated as a non-invasive strategy to detect PG in parathyroidectomy and in PG preservation in thyroidectomy. There are currently two FDA approved NIRAF modalities, image-based and probe-based. The aim of this meta-analysis is to evaluate the efficacy of these two NIRAF modalities. PubMed, Scopus, and MEDLINE were utilized, with 238 studies analyzed via independent, blinded review. Studies from January 2000 to February 2023, Boolean phrase "parathyroid autofluorescence", written in English, and included results found within the body of the article were the inclusion criteria used. Conference abstracts, reviews, case reports, commentary, discussion and letter, non-English, animal studies, in vitro studies, contrast enhanced fluorescence, and NIRAF with use of indocyanine green, were the exclusion criteria used. Five studies were enrolled based on inclusion and exclusion criteria. The estimated overall accuracy of image-based methods is 0.96 (95% CI of (0.87, 0.99)), while the estimated overall accuracy of probe-based methods is 0.93 (95% CI of (0.92, 0.94)). With p=0.36, there is insufficient evidence to indicate a significant difference in overall accuracy, sensitivity and specificity between image-based methods and probe-based methods. Both imaging and probe-based detection modalities offer effective, noninvasive means for identifying parathyroid glands intraoperatively. Further studies comparing the efficacy of these two modalities are needed to further differentiate their clinical performance.
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.