Indocyanine green fluorescence-guided surgery in the emergency setting: the WSES international consensus position paper
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Decision-making in emergency settings is inherently complex, requiring surgeons to rapidly evaluate various clinical, diagnostic, and environmental factors. The primary objective is to assess a patient's risk for adverse outcomes while balancing diagnoses, management strategies, and available resources. Recently, indocyanine green (ICG) fluorescence imaging has emerged as a valuable tool to enhance surgical vision, demonstrating proven benefits in elective surgeries. AIM: This consensus paper provides evidence-based and expert opinion-based recommendations for the standardized use of ICG fluorescence imaging in emergency settings. METHODS: Using the PICO framework, the consensus coordinator identified key research areas, topics, and questions regarding the implementation of ICG fluorescence-guided surgery in emergencies. A systematic literature review was conducted, and evidence was evaluated using the GRADE criteria. A panel of expert surgeons reviewed and refined statements and recommendations through a Delphi consensus process, culminating in final approval. RESULTS: ICG fluorescence imaging, including angiography and cholangiography, improves intraoperative decision-making in emergency surgeries, potentially reducing procedure duration, complications, and hospital stays. Optimal use requires careful consideration of dosage and timing due to limited tissue penetration (5-10 mm) and variable performance in patients with significant inflammation, scarring, or obesity. ICG is contraindicated in patients with known allergies to iodine or iodine-based contrast agents. Successful implementation depends on appropriate training, availability of equipment, and careful patient selection. CONCLUSIONS: Advanced technologies and intraoperative navigation techniques, such as ICG fluorescence-guided surgery, should be prioritized in emergency surgery to improve outcomes. This technology exemplifies precision surgery by enhancing minimally invasive approaches and providing superior real-time evaluation of bowel viability and biliary structures-areas traditionally reliant on the surgeon's visual assessment. Its adoption in emergency settings requires proper training, equipment availability, and standardized protocols. Further research is needed to evaluate cost-effectiveness and expand its applications in urgent surgical procedures.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".