4.6 Article

Safety and Efficacy of Cone-Beam Computed Tomography-Guided Lung Tumor Localization with a Near-Infrared Marker: A Retrospective Study of 175 Patients

期刊

LIFE-BASEL
卷 12, 期 4, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/life12040494

关键词

near-infrared marking; small pulmonary nodules; indocyanine green; hybrid operating room

资金

  1. Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Taiwan [CORPG3L0341 CORPG3L0311]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study assessed the safety and efficacy of cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT)-guided localization using near-infrared (NIR) marking. The results indicate that needle localization with indocyanine green (ICG) injection is a safe and feasible technique for preoperative localization of solitary pulmonary nodules (SPNs).
Preoperative localization holds promise for overcoming the limitations of video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) in the treatment of impalpable lung nodules. The purpose of this study was to assess the safety and efficacy of cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT)-guided localization using near-infrared (NIR) marking. Between 2017 and 2021, patients presenting with a solitary pulmonary nodule (SPN) who had undergone CBCT-guided lesion localization with indocyanine green (ICG) in a hybrid operating room were included. The primary outcomes were the efficacy of localization and the occurrence of complications. The study cohort consisted of 175 patients with the mean age of 58.76 years. The mean size and depth of the 175 SPNs were 8.34 mm and 5.3 mm, respectively. The mean time required for lesion marking was 14.71 min. Upon thoracoscopic inspection, the NIR tattoo was detected in the vast majority of the study participants (98.3%). An utility thoracotomy to allow digital palpation was required in two of the three patients in whom the tattoo was not identifiable. The perioperative survival rate was 100%, and the mean length of hospital stay was 3.09 days. We conclude that needle localization with ICG injection is a safe and feasible technique to localize SPNs prior to resection.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据