SynthesisFrontiers in endocrinology2026
Near-infrared autofluorescence versus visual identification during parathyroidectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of surgical outcomes.
Synthesis in Frontiers in endocrinology, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Near-infrared autofluorescence (NIRAF) is an emerging adjunctive tool that facilitates intraoperative identification of parathyroid glands. Although it has shown promise in the setting of thyroidectomy, its role in parathyroidectomy for primary hyperparathyroidism (PHPT) remains unclear. Methods: A systematic review was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines. Four databases were searched to identify studies comparing NIRAF with conventional visual identification of parathyroid glands during parathyroidectomy. The primary outcome was cure rates and secondary outcomes included operative time and the number of parathyroid glands identified. Methodological quality was assessed using Cochrane RoB2 and the Newcastle-Ottawa tools. Meta-analysis was performed using a random effects model. Results: Three studies comprising of 522 patients were included: randomized controlled trials and one observational cohort study. Meta-analysis showed a non-significant improvement in cure rates with NIRAF (RR 1.06, 95% CI: 1.02-1.10, p = 0.21). Mean operative time was reduced by 2.1 minutes with NIRAF (95% CI -4.76-9.0, p = 0.55) and the mean number of parathyroid glands identified increased by 0.12 per patient (95% CI -0.21-0.46, p = 0.46). Neither of the secondary outcomes reached statistical significance. Heterogeneity was moderate to high across the outcomes. Conclusion: Although NIRAF has proved promising in the setting of thyroidectomy, in the setting of parathyroidectomy for PHPT it did not offer statistically significant improvements in surgical outcomes. While the technology appears safe and promising, its impact on cure rates remains uncertain. Larger, high quality randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are warranted to define the role of NIRAF in parathyroid surgery more clearly.
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.