Matthew Griffiths1, Michael P Chae1, Warren Matthew Rozen1. 1. 1 St Andrew's Centre for Plastic Surgery and Burns, Broomfield Hospital, Mid Essex Hospital Services NHS Trust, Chelmsford, Essex CM1 7ET, UK ; 2 Department of Surgery, School of Clinical Science at Monash Health, Faculty of Medicine, Monash University, Monash Medical Centre, Clayton 3168, Victoria, Australia ; 3 Monash University Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Group (Peninsula Clinical School), Peninsula Health, Frankston, Victoria 3199, Australia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Fluorescent angiography (FA) has been useful for assessing blood flow and assessing tissue perfusion in ophthalmology and other surgical disciplines for decades. In plastic surgery, indocyanine green (ICG) dye-based FA is a relatively novel imaging technology with high potential in various applications. We review the various FA detector systems currently available and critically appraise its utility in breast reconstruction. METHODS: A review of the published English literature dating from 1950 to 2015 using databases, such as PubMed, Medline, Web of Science, and EMBASE was undertaken. RESULTS: In comparison to the old fluorescein dye, ICG has a superior side effect profile and can be accurately detected by various commercial devices, such as SPY Elite (Novadaq, Canada), FLARE (Curadel LLC, USA), PDE-Neo (Hamamatsu Photonics, Japan), Fluobeam 800 (Fluoptics, France), and IC-View (Pulsion Medical Systems AG, Germany). In breast reconstruction, ICG has established as a safer, more accurate tracer agent, in lieu of the traditional blue dyes, for detection of sentinel lymph nodes with radioactive isotopes ((99m)-Technetium). In prosthesis-based breast reconstruction, intraoperative assessment of the mastectomy skin flap to guide excision of hypoperfused areas translates to improved clinical outcomes. Similarly, in autologous breast reconstructions, FA can be utilized to detect poorly perfused areas of the free flap, evaluate microvascular anastomosis for patency, and assess SIEA vascular territory for use as an alternative free flap with minimal donor site morbidity. CONCLUSIONS: ICG-based FA is a novel, useful tool for various applications in breast reconstruction. More studies with higher level of evidence are currently lacking to validate this technology.
BACKGROUND: Fluorescent angiography (FA) has been useful for assessing blood flow and assessing tissue perfusion in ophthalmology and other surgical disciplines for decades. In plastic surgery, indocyanine green (ICG) dye-based FA is a relatively novel imaging technology with high potential in various applications. We review the various FA detector systems currently available and critically appraise its utility in breast reconstruction. METHODS: A review of the published English literature dating from 1950 to 2015 using databases, such as PubMed, Medline, Web of Science, and EMBASE was undertaken. RESULTS: In comparison to the old fluorescein dye, ICG has a superior side effect profile and can be accurately detected by various commercial devices, such as SPY Elite (Novadaq, Canada), FLARE (Curadel LLC, USA), PDE-Neo (Hamamatsu Photonics, Japan), Fluobeam 800 (Fluoptics, France), and IC-View (Pulsion Medical Systems AG, Germany). In breast reconstruction, ICG has established as a safer, more accurate tracer agent, in lieu of the traditional blue dyes, for detection of sentinel lymph nodes with radioactive isotopes ((99m)-Technetium). In prosthesis-based breast reconstruction, intraoperative assessment of the mastectomy skin flap to guide excision of hypoperfused areas translates to improved clinical outcomes. Similarly, in autologous breast reconstructions, FA can be utilized to detect poorly perfused areas of the free flap, evaluate microvascular anastomosis for patency, and assess SIEA vascular territory for use as an alternative free flap with minimal donor site morbidity. CONCLUSIONS:ICG-based FA is a novel, useful tool for various applications in breast reconstruction. More studies with higher level of evidence are currently lacking to validate this technology.
Authors: Donald J Lucas; Jennifer Sabino; Craig D Shriver; Timothy M Pawlik; Devinder P Singh; Amy E Vertrees Journal: Am Surg Date: 2015-01 Impact factor: 0.688
Authors: Claudia R Albornoz; Peter B Bach; Babak J Mehrara; Joseph J Disa; Andrea L Pusic; Colleen M McCarthy; Peter G Cordeiro; Evan Matros Journal: Plast Reconstr Surg Date: 2013-01 Impact factor: 4.730
Authors: John Quan Minh Nguyen; Melanie McWade; Giju Thomas; Bryce T Beddard; Jennifer L Herington; Bibhash C Paria; Herbert S Schwartz; Jennifer L Halpern; Ginger E Holt; Anita Mahadevan-Jansen Journal: J Med Imaging (Bellingham) Date: 2018-03-02
Authors: Maxime D Slooter; Wietse J Eshuis; Miguel A Cuesta; Suzanne S Gisbertz; Mark I van Berge Henegouwen Journal: J Thorac Dis Date: 2019-04 Impact factor: 2.895