| Literature DB >> 35719988 |
Zhi-Nuan Hong1,2,3,4, Liqin Huang5, Weiguang Zhang1,2,3,4, Mingqiang Kang1,2,3,4.
Abstract
Objectives: This meta-analysis evaluated the short-term safety and efficacy of indocyanine green (ICG) fluorescence in gastric reconstruction to determine a suitable anastomotic position during esophagectomy.Entities:
Keywords: anastomotic leak; esophagectomy; indocyanine green; meta-analysis; short-term outcome
Year: 2022 PMID: 35719988 PMCID: PMC9198426 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2022.847510
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Oncol ISSN: 2234-943X Impact factor: 5.738
Figure 1PRISMA flow diagram. PRISMA, Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis.
Baseline characteristics of included studies.
| Included studies | Heterogeneity | Model | Pooled effect | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| I2% | 95% CI |
| |||
| Male | 8 | 0.49 | 0 | Fixed | 0.93 (0.67-1.29) | 0.49 |
| Age | 6 | 0.03 | 59.8 | Random | 0.07 (-0.08-0.22) | 0.35 |
| BMI | 4 | 0.43 | 0 | Fixed | 0.12 (-0.08-0.31) | 0.25 |
| History of smoking | 2 | 0.92 | 0 | Fixed | 1.12 (0.70-1381) | 0.63 |
| ASA I-II | 3 | 0.1 | 51.7 | Random | 0.63 (0.4-0.99) | 0.04 |
| SSC | 6 | 0.34 | 7.6 | Fixed | 0.98 (0.56-1.71) | 0.94 |
| Diabetes mellitus | 3 | 0.86 | 0 | Fixed | 1.14 (0.78-1.66) | 0.5 |
| Cardiovascular disease | 3 | 0.27 | 24 | Fixed | 1.08 (0.60-1.94) | 0.79 |
| Obstructive lung disease | 3 | 0.63 | 0 | Fixed | 0.37 (0.13-1.03) | 0.06 |
| Neoadjuvant therapy | 6 | 0.01 | 65 | Random | 0.59 (0.41-0.85) | 0.004 |
| Tumor in upper thoracic | 3 | 0.07 | 62.6 | Random | 0.86 (0.51-1.47) | 0.59 |
| Pathological Tumor Category T1-2 | 3 | 0.13 | 51 | Random | 0.87 (0.57-1.32) | 0.51 |
| TNM stage I-II | 4 | 0.006 | 75.6 | Random | 0.86 (0.60-1.23) | 0.4 |
| Thoracoscopy | 6 | 0.72 | 0 | Fixed | 2.73 (1.40-5.37) | 0.003 |
| Laparoscopy | 6 | 0.37 | 6.6 | Fixed | 2.17 (1.18-3.96) | 0.01 |
| Anastomotic procedure using Stapler | 3 | 0.49 | 0 | Fixed | 0.99 (0.57-1.70) | 0.97 |
| Gastric conduit Through posterior mediastinal | 6 | 0.51 | 0 | Fixed | 0.97 (0.44-2.17) | 0.95 |
| Preoperative albumin (mg/dl) | 2 | 0.17 | 46.8 | Fixed | -0.14 (-0.28--0.002) | 0.047 |
Quality assessment by methodological index for non-randomized studies tool.
| Author | Stated aim | Inclusion of consecutive patients | Prospective data collection | Endpoint appropriate for study | Unbiased assessment of study endpoint | F/U period approriate for study | Loss to follow-up <5% | Prospective calculation of study size | Adequate control group | Contemporary groups | Baseline aquivalence of groups | Adequate statistical analysis | Total score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Campbell et al. ( | 2 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 18 |
| Dalton et al. ( | 2 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 18 |
| Karampinis et al. ( | 2 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 17 |
| Kitagawa et al. ( | 2 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 18 |
| Noma et al. ( | 2 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 19 |
| Ohi et al. ( | 2 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 19 |
| Guo Jin-cheng et al. ( | 2 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 20 |
| Song Xuantong et al. ( | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 21 |
| Rao-Jun Luo et al. ( | 2 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 19 |
Summary of short-term clinical outcomes.
| Included studies | Heterogeneity | Model | Pooled effect | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| I2% | 95% CI |
| |||
| Intraoperative blood loss (ml) | 3 | 0.41 | 0 | Fixed | -9.18 (-21.34-2.99) | 0.14 |
| Operation time (min) | 4 | 0.21 | 33.1 | Fixed | 1.69 (-6.86-10.23) | 0.7 |
| Postoperative Hospital stay (d) | 4 | 0.44 | 0 | Fixed | -2.66 (-3.77--1.55) | 0 |
| AL | 9 | 0.46 | 0 | Fixed | 0.29 (0.18-0.47) | 0 |
| Surgical Wound infection | 2 | 0.32 | 0 | Fixed | 0.66 (0.29-1.49) | 0.31 |
| Pneumonia | 5 | 0.51 | 0 | Fixed | 0.85 (0.59-1.23) | 0.39 |
| Vocalcord paralysis | 2 | 0.27 | 17.9 | Fixed | 1.07 (0.98-1.16) | 0.13 |
| Arrhythmia | 3 | 0.04 | 77.5 | Random | 0.73 (0.47-1.12) | 0.15 |
| Reoperation | 7 | 0.70 | 0 | Fixed | 0.67 (0.20-2.22) | 0.52 |
| Overall mortality | 9 | 0.28 | 20.5 | Fixed | 1.23 (0.45-3.39) | 0.69 |
Al, anastomotic leak.
Figure 2Forest plot for anastomotic leak.
Figure 3Forest plot for subgroup analysis of anastomotic leak based on anastomosis site.
Figure 4Forest plot for subgroup analysis of anastomotic leak based on experimental group sample size.
Figure 5Forest plot for subgroup analysis of anastomotic leak based on indocyanine green fluorescence intervention time.
Figure 6Publication bias assessment. (A) Funnel plot; (B) Egger’s test funnel plot; (C) Begg’s test funnel plot; (D) Trim and fill funnel plot. Above four pictures were draw based on anastomotic leak rate.