search button
Open Access

Comparisons of ICG‑fluorescence with conventional tracers in sentinel lymph node biopsy for patients with early‑stage breast cancer: A meta‑analysis

  • Authors:
    • Rui Yin
    • Lu-Yu Ding
    • Qing-Zhong Wei
    • Ya Zhou
    • Guang-Yuan Tang
    • Xun Zhu

  • View Affiliations

  • Published online on: December 15, 2020     https://doi.org/10.3892/ol.2020.12375
  • Article Number: 114

  • Copyright: © Yin et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution License.

Metrics: Total Views: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )
Total PDF Downloads: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )


Abstract

Radioisotopes (RI) and blue dye (BD) are routinely used markers for staining during sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) in breast cancer. Compared with traditional tracers, tracer performance of indocyanine green (ICG) has been controversial. A total of 21 studies were selected from the PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library databases. Detection ability was judged based on four endpoints: i) The identification rate (IR) of the patients; ii) the IR of the sentinel lymph nodes (SLNs); iii) the IR of the positive SLNs; and iv) the false negative rate (FNR). Compared with BD, ICG was superior in terms of the IR of the patients [odds ratio (OR)=7.17; 95% CI, 3.98‑12.94), the IR of the SLNs (OR=8.84; 95% CI, 6.71‑11.66) and FNR (OR=0.20; 95% CI, 0.08‑0.48) using a fixed‑effects model. There was a significant difference in both the IR of the positive SLNs (OR=21.32; 95% CI, 2.84‑160.14) and FNR (OR=0.46; 95% CI, 0.23‑0.91) in the ICG vs. RI group. Furthermore, when using ICG at the recommended dose, a significant difference was found in the IR of the patients (OR=1.77; 95% CI, 1.09‑2.85) and the IR of the SLNs (OR=21.62; 95% CI, 5.23‑89.43) using a fixed‑effects model. In the ICG vs. BD combined with RI group, there were no differences in either the IR of the patients (OR=5.10; 95% CI, 0.24‑107.48) or the IR of SLNs (OR=5.10; 95% CI, 0.60‑256.66). In conclusion, ICG was a better tracer compared with BD or RI alone and was not a worse tracer compared with BD combined with RI. The use of the recommended dose of ICG had an improved tracer effect. ICG is expected to be widely used in SLNB in view of its clinical advantages.
View Figures
View References

Related Articles

Journal Cover

February-2021
Volume 21 Issue 2

Print ISSN: 1792-1074
Online ISSN:1792-1082

Sign up for eToc alerts

Recommend to Library

  • Journal Metrics
  • Impact Factor: 2.5
  • Ranked Oncology
    (total number of cites)
  • CiteScore: 5.7
  • CiteScore Rank: Q2: #139/404 Oncology
  • Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP): 0.574
  • SCImago Journal Rank (SJR): 0.644
International Symposium on Molecular Medicine Conference Banner
The Cancer Story
World Congress on Advances in Oncology and International Symposium on Molecular Medicine Conference Banner
World Academy Of Sciences Banner
Heyday Road Banner

0

Copy and paste a formatted citation
x
Spandidos Publications style
Yin R, Ding L, Wei Q, Zhou Y, Tang G and Zhu X: Comparisons of ICG‑fluorescence with conventional tracers in sentinel lymph node biopsy for patients with early‑stage breast cancer: A meta‑analysis. Oncol Lett 21: 114, 2021.
APA
Yin, R., Ding, L., Wei, Q., Zhou, Y., Tang, G., & Zhu, X. (2021). Comparisons of ICG‑fluorescence with conventional tracers in sentinel lymph node biopsy for patients with early‑stage breast cancer: A meta‑analysis. Oncology Letters, 21, 114. https://doi.org/10.3892/ol.2020.12375
MLA
Yin, R., Ding, L., Wei, Q., Zhou, Y., Tang, G., Zhu, X."Comparisons of ICG‑fluorescence with conventional tracers in sentinel lymph node biopsy for patients with early‑stage breast cancer: A meta‑analysis". Oncology Letters 21.2 (2021): 114.
Chicago
Yin, R., Ding, L., Wei, Q., Zhou, Y., Tang, G., Zhu, X."Comparisons of ICG‑fluorescence with conventional tracers in sentinel lymph node biopsy for patients with early‑stage breast cancer: A meta‑analysis". Oncology Letters 21, no. 2 (2021): 114. https://doi.org/10.3892/ol.2020.12375