ArticleBJS open2025
Indocyanine green versus technetium-99m for sentinel lymph node biopsy in breast cancer: the FLUORO trial.
Article in BJS open, 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.
- A Prospective Randomized Trial Comparing Radioguided Occult Lesion Localization (ROLL) and Magnetic Seed Localization for the Localization of Nonpalpable Breast Lesions: Analysis of Surgical Outcomes, Patient's Perception, and Costs.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Trial
- Indocyanine Green as a Single Tracer for Axillary Staging in Breast Cancer: A Retrospective Single-Centre Cohort Study.Cancers · 2026Article
- Dual-Tracer Imaging and Deep Learning for Real-Time Prediction of Lymph Node Metastasis in cN0 Papillary Thyroid Carcinoma.Cancers · 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundStandard sentinel lymph node (SLN) mapping for early breast cancer involves technetium-99m (99mTc) lymphoscintigraphy. Indocyanine green (ICG) fluorescence allows real-time visualization of lymphatics and nodes while avoiding radiation exposure and the inconvenience of 99mTc, but its inclusion in international guidelines is not widespread. This study compared efficacy and costs between ICG and 99mTc for axillary SLN lymphatic mapping.
methodsPatients with early breast cancer and clinically negative axilla who underwent lymphatic mapping with ICG and 99mTc were enrolled in a prospective single-institution single-arm non-randomized trial (2021-2024). Data on the number of SLNs, including metastatic nodes, rate of failed mapping, costs, and the surgeon's reported ease of mapping with ICG compared with 99mTc were collected. Cost analysis used Medicare item numbers and microcosting.
resultsA total of 305 patients were enrolled, with 637 SLNs sampled. The SLN identification rate was 97.8% (95% confidence interval (c.i.) 96.3 to 98.7%) for ICG and 98.3% (95% c.i. 96.9 to 99%) for 99mTc. The mean(standard deviation (s.d.)) number of SLNs identified with ICG and 99mTc was 2.06 (1.99) and 2.07 (2.02), respectively (P = 0.871). Metastatic SLNs were identified in 70 of 305 patients (23.0%), with 83 metastatic SLNs in total. ICG identified 79 of 83 metastatic SLNs (95.2%; 95% c.i. 88.3 to 98.1%) and 99mTc identified 82 of 83 metastatic SLNs (98.8%; 95% c.i. 93.5 to 99.8%; P = 0.256). Mean(s.d.) surgeon-reported ease for using ICG and 99mTc, rated used a five-point Likert scale, was 1.67 (0.98) (95% c.i. 1.56 to 1.78) and 1.5 (0.59) (95% c.i. 1.43 to 1.57), respectively (P = 0.082). 99mTc cost an additional EUR841 (95% c.i. EUR766 to EUR917) per patient but ICG would require > 35 patients before breaking even with initial outlay equipment costs.
conclusionICG fluorescence performed similarly to 99mTc lymphoscintigraphy and may be less costly over the long term.
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.