SynthesisSurgical endoscopy2026
Indocyanine green fluorescence to prevent anastomotic leak in colorectal surgery: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis on randomized controlled trials.
Synthesis in Surgical endoscopy, 2026. 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.
- Delayed fluorescence on indocyanine green angiography reflects impaired red blood cell perfusion: implications for intraoperative perfusion assessment in colorectal surgery.Updates in surgery · 2026Article
- Feasibility of laser speckle contrast imaging (LSCI) in colorectal surgery: a prospective comparison with indocyanine green (ICG) fluorescence angiography.Surgical endoscopy · 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn light of the recent publication of two multicentric controlled trials, this systematic review and meta-analysis aims to update the evidence of the efficacy of Indocyanine Green fluorescence angiography in preventing the risk of anastomotic leak after colorectal surgery.
methodsMEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL databases were searched for randomized controlled trials using relevant keywords from 2015 until September 2025. The outcomes were the overall rate of anastomotic leaks, the rate of reoperations, and the rate of intraoperative surgical strategy changes.
resultsTen randomized controlled trials were selected, including 4.885 patients, 2.432 (49.7%) who received intraoperative ICG assessment and 2.453 (50.3%) who underwent standard white light assessment. The studies displayed a moderate risk of bias and were included in the meta-analysis. The ICG group showed a reduced rate of anastomotic leak (OR = 0.64; p < 0.0001; high evidence) compared with the standard dressing group and a higher rate of changes in surgical strategy (OR = 7.50; p = 0.02; moderate evidence), while no difference was found in the rate of reoperations (OR = 0.94; p = 0.64; moderate evidence). A subgroup analysis showed reduced anastomotic leak rates in left colon (p = 0.003) and rectal resection (p = 0.0002) and no differences after right colon surgery (p = 0.94).
conclusionsThis systematic review and meta-analysis supports the use of ICG to reduce the anastomotic leak rate in colorectal surgery, in particular in left-sided and rectal resections.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41611909What 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.