Comparison of indocyanine green and blue-stained glue for preoperative localization for pulmonary nodules

Jia Lin,Jia Zhang,Ning Wei,An-Le Wu,Long-Fei Wang,Fei Teng,Yu-Tao Xian,Rui Han
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2024.1345288
IF: 4.7
2024-03-21
Frontiers in Oncology
Abstract:Background: In patients with pulmonary nodules undergoing computed tomography (CT)-guided localization procedures, a range of liquid-based materials have been employed to date in an effort to guide video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) procedures to resect target nodules. However, the relative performance of these different liquid-based localization strategies has yet to be systematically evaluated. Accordingly, this study was developed with the aim of examining the relative safety and efficacy of CT-guided indocyanine green (IG) and blue-stained glue (BSG) PN localization. Methods: Consecutive patients with PNs undergoing CT-guided localization prior to VATS from November 2021 - April 2022 were enrolled in this study. Safety and efficacy outcomes were compared between patients in which different localization materials were used. Results: In total, localization procedures were performed with IG for 121 patients (140 PNs), while BSG was used for localization procedures for 113 patients (153 PNs). Both of these materials achieved 100% technical success rates for localization, with no significant differences between groups with respect to the duration of localization (P = 0.074) or visual analog scale scores (P = 0.787). Pneumothorax affected 8 (6.6%) and 8 (7.1%) patients in the respective IG and BSG groups (P = 0.887), while 12 (9.9%) and 10 (8.8%) patients of these patients experienced pulmonary hemorrhage. IG was less expensive than BSG ( 165). VATS sublobar resection procedure technical success rates were also 100% in both groups, with no instances of conversion to thoracotomy. Conclusions: IG and BSG both offer similarly high levels of clinical safety and efficacy when applied for preoperative CT-guided PN localization, with IG being less expensive than BSG.
oncology
What problem does this paper attempt to address?