Asian journal of endoscopic surgery · 2025
Details and Updates From the Consensus Meeting on Anatomical Borders for ICG Usage in Urological Laparoscopic and Robotic Kidney Surgery.
СтатьяОбзорConsensus StatementНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Narita Shintaro, Ichinose Junji, Itoh Shinji, Kobayashi Satoshi, Morizane Shuichi, Asano Daisuke, Kudo Yujin, Abe Toshiya, Ohuchida Kenoki, Akahoshi Keiichi, Wakabayashi Go, Shimizu Kimihiro, Iwata Hisashi, Takeneka Atsushi, Tanabe Minoru, Eto Masatoshi, Ikeda Norihiko, Nakamura Masafumi, Kitagawa Yuko, Yoshizumi Tomoharu, Mun Mingyon, Habuchi Tomonori
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: This study aimed to update the literature and present findings from a national survey on the current use and perceived utility of indocyanine green (ICG) fluorescence imaging in laparoscopic and robotic kidney surgeries, as discussed at the Consensus Meeting on Anatomy on the Border.
METHODS: This study consisted of two parts. First, a narrative review of previous studies on ICG application in kidney surgeries was conducted. Second, a questionnaire for urologists certified in laparoscopic surgery was created to evaluate current practices regarding ICG usage.
RESULTS: Nine studies on ICG use in partial nephrectomy were reviewed. The sole randomized controlled trial (RCT) found no significant benefit of ICG-guided robotic-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN), although the majority of observational studies suggested potential advantages. The lack of methodological standardization remains a major barrier to its wider implementation. Of the 114 urologists contacted, 32 (28%) responded, most of whom had over 20 years of surgical experience. Among the respondents, 31% reported using ICG in renal surgeries: 20% used it exclusively in RAPN, 60% in RAPN in combination with other procedures, and 20% in other surgeries. The dosing varied, but over half of the respondents used 12.5 mg per injection.
CONCLUSION: Although observational data indicate the potential utility of ICG in renal surgery, the RCT finding is inconclusive, and its current use among urologists remains limited. Nevertheless, ICG holds promise for a broader application in urological procedures.
METHODS: This study consisted of two parts. First, a narrative review of previous studies on ICG application in kidney surgeries was conducted. Second, a questionnaire for urologists certified in laparoscopic surgery was created to evaluate current practices regarding ICG usage.
RESULTS: Nine studies on ICG use in partial nephrectomy were reviewed. The sole randomized controlled trial (RCT) found no significant benefit of ICG-guided robotic-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN), although the majority of observational studies suggested potential advantages. The lack of methodological standardization remains a major barrier to its wider implementation. Of the 114 urologists contacted, 32 (28%) responded, most of whom had over 20 years of surgical experience. Among the respondents, 31% reported using ICG in renal surgeries: 20% used it exclusively in RAPN, 60% in RAPN in combination with other procedures, and 20% in other surgeries. The dosing varied, but over half of the respondents used 12.5 mg per injection.
CONCLUSION: Although observational data indicate the potential utility of ICG in renal surgery, the RCT finding is inconclusive, and its current use among urologists remains limited. Nevertheless, ICG holds promise for a broader application in urological procedures.