Real-time fluorescence image-guided gastrointestinal oncologic surgery: Towards a new era

Table 2 Summary of the studies on involving lymph node detection in gastrointestinal cancer

Ref.	Patients	Detection rate	Sensitivity	Specificity	Considerations
Kusano et al[76], 2008	26 CRC, 22 GC	CRC: 90.9%, GC: 88%	CRC: S: 25%1, GS: 40%1	Sp: 100%1, Sp: 100%1	CRC: PPV: 100% NPV: 81%, GC: PPV: 100% NPV: 62.5%
Cahill et al[78], 2009	891	NR	81%	93.2%1	PPV: 62% NPV: 95%. Lower FN if tumor size is less than 35 mm. IHC analysis increases sensitivity
Noura et al[58], 2010	25	92%	100%	100%	FNR: 0%. NPV: 100% Performed lateral pelvic dissection in order to increase SN detection accuracy
Kitagawa et al[80], 2013	397	97.5%	93.44%1	98.99%1	Uses dual technique (blue dye and ICG)
Kinami et al[82], 2015	72		90%	98%1	FN: 1.3%
Tummers et al[79], 2016	26	95%	75%	88.9%	Reduces second-tier nodes using nanocolloids
Lee et al[83], 2016	20	95%	100%	94.4%	FN: 0%
Villegas-Tovar et al[57], 2020	281	91%	64.3%	65%	AUC: 66.5%

¹Calculated using the data provided at the papers. AUC: Area under the curve; CRC: Colorectal cancer; FN: False negatives; FNR: False negative rate; GC: Gastric cancer; ICH: Immunohistochemistry; NPV: Negative predictive value; NR: Non reported; PPV: Positive predictive value; SN: Sentinel node.