ArticleSurgical endoscopy2026
Does ICG-NIRF cholangiography replace the critical view of safety in laparoscopic cholecystectomy? A prospective evaluation on biliary visualization dynamics and the impact of inflammation.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWhile indocyanine green near-infrared fluorescence (ICG-NIRF) cholangiography is increasingly used to facilitate real-time biliary visualization, its ability to substitute for the Critical View of Safety (CVS) as a primary anatomical endpoint remains unclear. This study aimed to characterize the intraoperative dynamics of ICG-NIRF and evaluate the impact of acute cholecystitis (AC) on its reliability.
methodsIn this prospective study of 96 consecutive patients (48 AC; 48 non-AC), biliary visualization was assessed at three milestones: T1 (dissection onset), T2 (CVS declaration), and T3 (pre-clipping). Patients received ICG (1.25 mg) at induction. Dissection followed the Tokyo Guidelines 2018 (TG18) framework using standardized subserosal-inner layer technique to achieve the CVS. The primary endpoint was the simultaneous visualization of the common bile duct (CBD), common hepatic duct (CHD), and cystic duct (CyD). Factors affecting visualization were analyzed using generalized estimating equations and multivariable regression.
resultsCVS was achieved in 93.8% of cases, whereas simultaneous three-duct NIRF visualization was achieved in only 16.7% at T1, showing significant temporal improvement by T3 (46.9%; OR 4.61, p < 0.001). Multivariable analysis identified AC as the sole independent predictor of both CBD (OR 4.48, p = 0.016) and CHD (OR 3.80, p = 0.003) non-visualization at T3, with identification failure rates increasing stepwise with TG18 severity (p = 0.001).
conclusionICG-NIRF signals follow a dissection-dependent trajectory that is consistently attenuated by inflammation. Because the CVS provides anatomical certainty far beyond that of fluorescence alone, ICG-NIRF complements but does not replace the standardized dissection framework. In cases of severe AC, surgeons must prioritize meticulous surgical maneuvers over potentially unreliable fluorescence signals.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42844367What 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.