ArticleJournal of anesthesia2026
Assessment of fluorescence interference in the basophil activation test: a case of indocyanine green-induced anaphylaxis.
Article in Journal of anesthesia, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Indocyanine green (ICG) is increasingly used for fluorescence-guided surgery and can rarely cause perioperative anaphylaxis. The basophil activation test (BAT) is a safe in vitro tool for identifying culprit drugs, but its flow-cytometric readout could theoretically be confounded by the intrinsic near-infrared fluorescence of dyes such as ICG, and this potential interference has not been systematically examined. We describe a patient who developed intraoperative anaphylactic shock after ICG injection and assessed whether its intrinsic fluorescence confounds the BAT. In the patient, BAT showed a clear concentration-dependent increase in CD203c expression, supporting ICG as the culprit. Two complementary observations suggested that ICG fluorescence did not substantially confound the assay: whole-blood samples containing ICG without antibodies produced no detectable signal in the PE channel, and BAT in three control subjects who tolerated ICG showed no activation except a nonspecific increase at the highest concentration. As a proof of concept, this approach may help apply BAT to ICG and, potentially, to other fluorescent or chromogenic drugs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42802243What 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.