ArticleSurgical endoscopy2026
Targeting indocyanine green where it matters most: a CRP-stratified cohort study in acute cholecystitis.
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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIntraoperative indocyanine green (ICG) fluorescence cholangiography has been linked to fewer conversions to open surgery in emergency cholecystectomy, but it adds cost, and evidence for its effect on conversion and operative time is graded moderate to low even by the consensus statement recommending routine use. We asked whether preoperative C-reactive protein (CRP), a marker of surgical difficulty and conversion risk, identifies patients in whom ICG's benefit is greatest.
methodsProspective cohort of 221 patients undergoing emergency laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis, stratified by ICG use (85 ICG vs 136 conventional). We tested the interaction between CRP and ICG use on conversion using Firth penalized logistic regression, and on operative time, length of stay, and complications using linear/logistic regression with a log-CRP sensitivity analysis. We compared conversion rates across CRP tertiles and calculated a CRP-stratified estimated absolute risk reduction (ARR) and number needed to treat (NNT).
resultsConversion occurred only in the conventional arm (12/136, 8.8%; 0/85 ICG), rising from 0 to 15.4% across CRP tertiles. The formal CRP×ICG interaction for conversion was not significant (Firth model, p = 0.878), reflecting the absence of ICG-arm events; the ARR associated with ICG use rose from not estimable to 9.8 points (95% CI 3.9-22.5; NNT≈10) in the middle tertile and 15.4 points (95% CI 8.0-27.5; NNT 6.5) in the highest. The interaction was significant for operative time (p = 0.045), strengthening under a log-CRP sensitivity model (p = 0.001), with CRP-related lengthening of surgery markedly smaller in the ICG arm.
conclusionsIn this cohort, ICG's clinical benefit was not uniform across the CRP range. The CRP×ICG interaction reached significance for operative time; for conversion, the pattern was consistent and clinically plausible but not statistically significant, and should be regarded as hypothesis-generating. A CRP-informed strategy for prioritising ICG may be worth testing prospectively.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42902004What 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.