Carmen C Solórzano1, Giju Thomas2, Naira Baregamian1, Anita Mahadevan-Jansen2. 1. Division of Surgical Oncology & Endocrine Surgery, Department of Surgery, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN. 2. Vanderbilt Biophotonics Center, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: With the recent approval of 2 NIRAF-based devices for label-free identification of PG by the Food and Drug Administration, it becomes crucial to educate the surgical community on the realistic scope of this emerging technology. Here, we have compiled a review of studies that utilize NIRAF and present a critical appraisal of this technique for intraoperative PG detection. BACKGROUND: Failure to visualize PGs could lead to accidental damage/excision of healthy PGs or inability to localize diseased PGs, resulting in postsurgical complications. The discovery that PGs have NIRAF led to new avenues for intraoperatively identifying PGs with high accuracy in real-time. METHODS: Using the following key terms: "parathyroid, near infrared, autofluorescence" in various search engines such as PubMed and Google Scholar, we identified various publications relevant to this review of NIRAF as a technique for PG identification. Articles were excluded if they focused solely on contrast agents, served as commentaries/overviews on NIRAF or were not written in English. RESULTS: To date, studies have investigated the potential of NIRAF detection for (i) identifying PG tissues intraoperatively, (ii) locating PGs before or after dissection, (iii) distinguishing healthy from diseased PGs, and (iv) minimizing postoperative hypocalcemia after total thyroidectomy. CONCLUSIONS: Because NIRAF-based identification of PG is noninvasive and label-free, the popularity of this approach has considerably surged. As the present limitations of various technologies capable of NIRAF detection are identified, we anticipate that newer device iterations will continue to be developed enhancing the current merits of these modalities to aid surgeons in identifying and preserving PGs. However, more concrete and long-term outcome studies with these modalities are essential to determine the impact of this technique on patient outcome and actual cost-benefits.
OBJECTIVE: With the recent approval of 2 NIRAF-based devices for label-free identification of PG by the Food and Drug Administration, it becomes crucial to educate the surgical community on the realistic scope of this emerging technology. Here, we have compiled a review of studies that utilize NIRAF and present a critical appraisal of this technique for intraoperative PG detection. BACKGROUND: Failure to visualize PGs could lead to accidental damage/excision of healthy PGs or inability to localize diseased PGs, resulting in postsurgical complications. The discovery that PGs have NIRAF led to new avenues for intraoperatively identifying PGs with high accuracy in real-time. METHODS: Using the following key terms: "parathyroid, near infrared, autofluorescence" in various search engines such as PubMed and Google Scholar, we identified various publications relevant to this review of NIRAF as a technique for PG identification. Articles were excluded if they focused solely on contrast agents, served as commentaries/overviews on NIRAF or were not written in English. RESULTS: To date, studies have investigated the potential of NIRAF detection for (i) identifying PG tissues intraoperatively, (ii) locating PGs before or after dissection, (iii) distinguishing healthy from diseased PGs, and (iv) minimizing postoperative hypocalcemia after total thyroidectomy. CONCLUSIONS: Because NIRAF-based identification of PG is noninvasive and label-free, the popularity of this approach has considerably surged. As the present limitations of various technologies capable of NIRAF detection are identified, we anticipate that newer device iterations will continue to be developed enhancing the current merits of these modalities to aid surgeons in identifying and preserving PGs. However, more concrete and long-term outcome studies with these modalities are essential to determine the impact of this technique on patient outcome and actual cost-benefits.
Authors: Yang Liu; Adam Q Bauer; Walter J Akers; Gail Sudlow; Kexian Liang; Duanwen Shen; Mikhail Y Berezin; Joseph P Culver; Samuel Achilefu Journal: Surgery Date: 2011-05 Impact factor: 3.982
Authors: Roland Ladurner; Klaus K J Hallfeldt; Norah Al Arabi; Herbert Stepp; Susanna Mueller; Julia K S Gallwas Journal: Lasers Surg Med Date: 2013-11-19 Impact factor: 4.025
Authors: Melanie A McWade; Giju Thomas; John Q Nguyen; Melinda E Sanders; Carmen C Solórzano; Anita Mahadevan-Jansen Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2019-02-13 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: Melanie A McWade; Constantine Paras; Lisa M White; John E Phay; Carmen C Solórzano; James T Broome; Anita Mahadevan-Jansen Journal: J Clin Endocrinol Metab Date: 2014-12 Impact factor: 5.958
Authors: Fares Benmiloud; Stanislas Rebaudet; Arthur Varoquaux; Guillaume Penaranda; Marie Bannier; Anne Denizot Journal: Surgery Date: 2017-11-06 Impact factor: 3.982
Authors: Melanie A McWade; Constantine Paras; Lisa M White; John E Phay; Anita Mahadevan-Jansen; James T Broome Journal: Surgery Date: 2013-12 Impact factor: 3.982
Authors: Giju Thomas; Carmen C Solórzano; Naira Baregamian; Emmanuel A Mannoh; Rekha Gautam; Rebecca T Irlmeier; Fei Ye; Jon A Nelson; Samuel E Long; Paul G Gauger; Alexa Magner; Tyler Metcalf; Lawrence A Shirley; John E Phay; Anita Mahadevan-Jansen Journal: Am J Surg Date: 2021-05-13 Impact factor: 2.565
Authors: Carmen C Solórzano; Giju Thomas; Eren Berber; Tracy S Wang; Gregory W Randolph; Quan-Yang Duh; Frédéric Triponez Journal: Surgery Date: 2020-11-01 Impact factor: 3.982
Authors: Florian van Beurden; Danny M van Willigen; Borivoj Vojnovic; Matthias N van Oosterom; Oscar R Brouwer; Henk G van der Poel; Hisataka Kobayashi; Fijs W B van Leeuwen; Tessa Buckle Journal: Mol Imaging Date: 2020 Jan-Dec Impact factor: 4.488