Sameh Hany Emile1,2, Sualeh Muslim Khan3, Steven D Wexner4. 1. General Surgery Department, Mansoura University Hospitals, Mansoura University, Mansoura, 35516, Egypt. sameh200@hotmail.com. 2. Department of Colorectal Surgery, Cleveland Clinic Florida, Weston, FL, USA. sameh200@hotmail.com. 3. Dow Medical College, Dow University of Health Sciences, Karachi, Pakistan. 4. Department of Colorectal Surgery, Cleveland Clinic Florida, Weston, FL, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In the present study, patients with colorectal anastomoses that were assessed with indocyanine green (ICG) fluorescence angiography (FA) were compared to patients who had only white light visual inspection of their anastomosis. The impact of change in surgical plan guided by ICG-FA on anastomotic leak (AL) rates was assessed. METHODS: PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were queried for eligible studies. Studies included were comparative cohort studies and randomized trials that compared perfusion assessment of colorectal anastomosis with ICG-FA and inspection under white light. Main outcome measures were change in surgical plan guided by ICG-FA and rates of AL. Risk of bias was assessed using RoB-2 and ROBINS-1 tools. Differences between the two groups in categorical and continuous variables were expressed as odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) and weighted mean difference. RESULTS: This systematic review included 27 studies comprising 8786 patients (48.5% males). Using ICG-FA was associated with significantly lower odds of AL (OR 0.452; 95% CI 0.366-0.558) and complications (OR 0.747; 95% CI 0.592-0.943) than the control group. The weighted mean rate of change in surgical plan based on ICG-FA was 9.6% (95% CI 7.3-11.8) and varied from 0.64% to 28.75%. A change in surgical plan was associated with significantly higher odds of AL (OR 2.73; 95% CI 1.54-4.82). LIMITATIONS: Technical heterogeneity due to using different dosage of ICG and statistical heterogeneity in operative time and complication rates. CONCLUSION: Assessment of colorectal anastomoses with ICG-FA is likely to be associated with lower odds of anastomotic leak than is traditional white light assessment. Change in plan based on ICG-FA may be associated with higher odds of AL. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42021235644.
BACKGROUND: In the present study, patients with colorectal anastomoses that were assessed with indocyanine green (ICG) fluorescence angiography (FA) were compared to patients who had only white light visual inspection of their anastomosis. The impact of change in surgical plan guided by ICG-FA on anastomotic leak (AL) rates was assessed. METHODS: PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were queried for eligible studies. Studies included were comparative cohort studies and randomized trials that compared perfusion assessment of colorectal anastomosis with ICG-FA and inspection under white light. Main outcome measures were change in surgical plan guided by ICG-FA and rates of AL. Risk of bias was assessed using RoB-2 and ROBINS-1 tools. Differences between the two groups in categorical and continuous variables were expressed as odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) and weighted mean difference. RESULTS: This systematic review included 27 studies comprising 8786 patients (48.5% males). Using ICG-FA was associated with significantly lower odds of AL (OR 0.452; 95% CI 0.366-0.558) and complications (OR 0.747; 95% CI 0.592-0.943) than the control group. The weighted mean rate of change in surgical plan based on ICG-FA was 9.6% (95% CI 7.3-11.8) and varied from 0.64% to 28.75%. A change in surgical plan was associated with significantly higher odds of AL (OR 2.73; 95% CI 1.54-4.82). LIMITATIONS: Technical heterogeneity due to using different dosage of ICG and statistical heterogeneity in operative time and complication rates. CONCLUSION: Assessment of colorectal anastomoses with ICG-FA is likely to be associated with lower odds of anastomotic leak than is traditional white light assessment. Change in plan based on ICG-FA may be associated with higher odds of AL. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42021235644.
Authors: Vicky Ka Ming Li; Steven D Wexner; Nestor Pulido; Hao Wang; Hei Yin Jin; Eric G Weiss; Juan J Nogeuras; Dana R Sands Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2009-03-20 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Zhouqiao Wu; Remondus C J van de Haar; Cloë L Sparreboom; Geesien S A Boersema; Ziyu Li; Jiafu Ji; Johannes Jeekel; Johan F Lange Journal: Int J Colorectal Dis Date: 2016-06-13 Impact factor: 2.571
Authors: Sameh Hany Emile; Sualeh Muslim Khan; Zoe Garoufalia; Emanuela Silva-Alvarenga; Rachel Gefen; Nir Horesh; Michael R Freund; Steven D Wexner Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2022-08-01 Impact factor: 3.267