<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!DOCTYPE article  PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing DTD v3.0 20080202//EN" "http://dtd.nlm.nih.gov/publishing/3.0/journalpublishing3.dtd"><article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" dtd-version="3.0" xml:lang="en" article-type="research article"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">JCT</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title>Journal of Cancer Therapy</journal-title></journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">2151-1934</issn><publisher><publisher-name>Scientific Research Publishing</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.4236/jct.2022.139049</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">JCT-119512</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="heading"><subject>Articles</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="Discipline-v2"><subject>Medicine&amp;Healthcare</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title>
 
 
  Efficacy of the Intraoperative Use of Indocyanine-Green Fluorescence Angiography in Laparoscopic Rectal Resections
 
</article-title></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Jingkun</surname><given-names>Shang</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Jingping</surname><given-names>He</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2"><sup>2</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Shouru</surname><given-names>Zhang</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Maocai</surname><given-names>Tang</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Ziling</surname><given-names>Zheng</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Hao</surname><given-names>Sun</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref></contrib></contrib-group><aff id="aff2"><addr-line>Pharmacy Intravenous Admixture Service Center, Chongqing University Cancer Hospital, Chongqing, China</addr-line></aff><aff id="aff1"><addr-line>Department of Gastrointestinal Cancer Center, Chongqing University Cancer Hospital, Chongqing, China</addr-line></aff><pub-date pub-type="epub"><day>29</day><month>08</month><year>2022</year></pub-date><volume>13</volume><issue>09</issue><fpage>549</fpage><lpage>560</lpage><history><date date-type="received"><day>13,</day>	<month>August</month>	<year>2022</year></date><date date-type="rev-recd"><day>27,</day>	<month>August</month>	<year>2022</year>	</date><date date-type="accepted"><day>30,</day>	<month>August</month>	<year>2022</year></date></history><permissions><copyright-statement>&#169; Copyright  2014 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc. </copyright-statement><copyright-year>2014</copyright-year><license><license-p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution International License (CC BY). http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</license-p></license></permissions><abstract><p>
 
 
  Background: 
  In traditional laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery, the
   surgeon’s method assess intestinal stumps blood supply is subject to certain subjectivity and blindness. Indocyanine green (ICG) real-time blood perfusion fluorescence angiography in laparoscopic radical resection of rectal cancer has great potential clinical value and can visually judge intestinal tract blood supply to improve the surgery safety, reduce postoperative complications, and ensure the recovery of patients after surgery. <b>Objective:</b> To explore the efficacy of the intraoperative use of indocyanine-green fluorescence angiography in laparoscopic rectal resections in patients with rectal cancer. <b>Methods: </b>In the present study, 109 rectal cancer patients were included and assigned to different surgical groups [ICG and control groups] for analysis. Statistical analysis was carried out for various common postoperative complications in the two groups. Finally, the patients in the ICG fluorescence imaging group had a timely adjustment of the proximal resection of the intestinal tube before the proximal bowel of the lesion was cut off when the intestinal blood supply was insufficiently assessed by fluorescence imaging. Two subgroups, the adjustment and the non-adjustment groups, were analyzed. <b>Results: </b>Compared with the control group, the postoperative anal ventilation time in the ICG group was shorter than that in the control group (P
   
  &lt;
   
  0.05). In addition, the postoperative complications were lower than those in the control group, and the differences were statistically significant (P
   
  &lt;
   
  0.05). However, the distance between the tumor from the anal verge in the adjustment group was smaller than that in the non-adjustment group, and the difference was statistically significant (P
   
  &lt;
   
  0.01). <b>Conclusion: </b>Compared with conventional
   
  laparoscopic radical resection of rectal cancer, ICG real-time indocyanine green fluore
  - 
  scence angiography was safe and feasible. This technique is a promising
   intraoperative tool for the assessment of bowel perfusion especially suitable for patients with lower rectal cancer.
 
</p></abstract><kwd-group><kwd>Laparoscopic Rectal Resection</kwd><kwd> Indocyanine</kwd><kwd> Rectal Cancer</kwd></kwd-group></article-meta></front><body><sec id="s1"><title>1. Introduction</title><p>Rectal cancer is one of the most common malignant tumors of the digestive tract. In recent years, the incidence of rectal cancer has increased, and it has the characteristics of a low location and young age. It has become one of the major malignant tumors that seriously threaten human health. Surgical resection is still the main treatment method for rectal cancer. With the continuous progress of minimally invasive surgery and the rapid development of surgical techniques and equipment, the radical cure of rectal cancer and the survival rate of patients are improving. However, anastomotic leakage after rectal surgery is still one of the most serious complications. The incidence of anastomotic leakage after rectal cancer surgery ranges from 1% to 20%. Postoperative anastomotic leakage increases the reoperation rate, hospital stay, and postoperative mortality risk and adversely affects patient outcomes [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.119512-ref1">1</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.119512-ref2">2</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.119512-ref3">3</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.119512-ref4">4</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.119512-ref5">5</xref>]. There are many reasons for anastomotic leakage closely related to factors such as low anastomosis, male sex, preoperative radiotherapy and chemotherapy, anastomotic technique, anastomotic tension, anastomotic tissue blood supply, and systemic nutritional status [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.119512-ref6">6</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.119512-ref7">7</xref>]. Among them, the blood supply of the anastomotic stoma is one of the indicators observed and optimized during the operation, but traditional naked-eye observation has a certain degree of subjectivity, and the accuracy needs to be discussed [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.119512-ref8">8</xref>]. Real-time blood perfusion fluorescence imaging combined with indocyanine green (ICG) during radical resection for rectal cancer can objectively determine intestinal canal blood perfusion around the anastomosis, bringing great benefits to rectal cancer surgical treatment [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.119512-ref9">9</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.119512-ref10">10</xref>]. We collected clinical data of patients who underwent ICG real-time vascular fluorescence imaging during laparoscopic radical rectal cancer surgery in our department from October 2020 to March 2022. We analyzed, compared, and reported the clinical application of ICG real-time blood flow perfusion fluorescence imaging in laparoscopic radical rectal cancer surgery.</p></sec><sec id="s2"><title>2. Materials and Methods</title><sec id="s2_1"><title>2.1. General Clinical Information</title><p>The data of 109 patients who underwent laparoscopic radical resection of rectal cancer in this operation group from October 2020 to March 2022 in the Gastrointestinal Surgery of Chongqing University Affiliated Cancer Hospital were collected. The patients were divided into groups according to whether ICG real-time blood flow perfusion fluorescence imaging was performed during the operation. For the ICG fluorescence imaging group and the control group, the ICG fluorescence imaging group underwent ICG real-time blood flow perfusion fluorescence imaging in laparoscopic radical rectal cancer surgery. In contrast, the control group only underwent laparoscopic radical rectal cancer surgery. There were 52 patients in the ICG fluorescence imaging group, aged between 52 and 72 years old, and 57 patients in the control group, aged between 50 and 73 years old. All patients underwent routine colonoscopy pathological biopsy, enhanced chest-abdominal-pelvic CT., and serum tumor marker monitoring. The patients were diagnosed with rectal cancer before surgery. All patients completed the operation under laparoscopy, and no patient was converted to laparotomy. The following patients were excluded: 1) Distant metastases to the liver, lungs, and other distant organs; 2) Intestinal obstruction not relieved before surgery; 3) Heart, brain, lung, and other organs insufficient and could not tolerate laparoscopic surgery; 4) Combined organ resection that required and emergency surgery; and 5) patients allergic to indocyanine green. Both groups of patients signed informed consent for laparoscopic surgery.</p></sec><sec id="s2_2"><title>2.2. Surgical Methods</title><p>The same fixed operation group performed all operations in gastrointestinal surgery. The chief surgeon was experienced in laparoscopic surgery. The patient received oral sodium phosphate oral solution for bowel preparation the night before surgery, and prophylactic intravenous antibiotics were administered 30 minutes before surgery. General anesthesia with tracheal intubation and routine catheterization were routinely used in all operations. Fluorescence laparoscopy uses the Stryker high-definition laparoscopic surgical fluorescence system. Both groups of patients underwent standardized laparoscopic radical rectal resection procedures, strictly following the principles of total mesentery resection and standardized lymph node dissection. The excised specimens were removed from the lower abdominal auxiliary small incision. In the ICG group, 25 mg of indocyanine green was diluted in 10 ml of normal saline, and a 3 ml dose was rapidly injected into the peripheral blood vessels. Real-time blood perfusion was evaluated and recorded by fluorescence imaging before dissection, placement of the stapler, and after anastomosis (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref>). In the ICG group, when the intestinal blood supply was insufficiently assessed by fluorescence imaging before the intestinal canal was severed, the operator adjusted the intestinal canal to the site with good blood supply according to the intestinal fluorescence imaging. Then, the operator separated the intestinal canal. After the digestive tract reconstruction was completed, the anastomotic intestinal blood was re-evaluated for perfusion confirmation. The control group used the conventional high-definition laparoscopic system, adopted the same surgical separation method and anastomosis</p><p>method, and completed the anastomosis through the surgeon’s naked eye assessment of the intestinal blood supply.</p></sec><sec id="s2_3"><title>2.3. Data Collection</title><p>The sex, age, anesthesia classification (ASA), body mass index (BMI), preoperative stage, smoking history, diabetes history, neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy history, abdominal surgery history, and the distance from the tumor to the anus were compared and analyzed between the two groups. The operation time (from skin incision to the end of skin suture), intraoperative blood loss (anesthesia record sheet), postoperative anal ventilation time, postoperative hospital stay, C-reactive protein value on the first postoperative day, number of lymph nodes dissected, postoperative pathological and TN staging were compared between the two groups of patients. For statistical analysis, the common perioperative complications, such as postoperative intestinal obstruction, abdominal hemorrhage, incision infection, abdominal infection, anastomotic leakage, and anastomotic bleeding were recorded. In the ICG fluorescence imaging group, before the proximal bowel of the lesion was severed, the scope of the proximal bowel resection was adjusted in time when the intestinal blood supply was insufficiently assessed by fluorescence imaging. Whether the proximal margin adjustment was performed during the operation, the patients were divided into adjusted and unadjusted subgroups, for analysis. Sex, age, anesthesia classification (ASA), body mass index (BMI), preoperative stage, smoking history, diabetes history, neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy history, abdominal surgery history, and the distance between the tumor and the anus were compared between the two subgroups of patients.</p></sec><sec id="s2_4"><title>2.4. Statistical Analysis</title><p>SPSS 18.0 software was used for statistical analysis of the clinical data of all patients. The measurements are expressed as the mean &#177; standard deviation (x &#177; s), and a T test was used for statistical analysis. The enumeration data are expressed as percentages, and the χ<sup>2</sup> test was used for statistical analysis. P &lt; 0.05 indicated a statistically significant difference.</p></sec></sec><sec id="s3"><title>3. Results</title><sec id="s3_1"><title>3.1. Comparative Analysis of General Clinical Data</title><p>There was no significant difference in terms of sex, age, anesthesia classification (ASA), body mass index (BMI), preoperative stage, smoking history, diabetes history, neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy history, abdominal surgery history, or tumor distance from the anus between the ICG group and the control group in the general data of the two groups of patients (p &gt; 0.05). The two groups were comparable (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table1">Table 1</xref>).</p><p>Comparison of intraoperative and postoperative conditions</p><p>Radical resection of rectal cancer was completed under laparoscopy in all cases, and there was no case of conversion to laparotomy. Although there were no significant differences in intraoperative blood loss, operation time, postoperative hospital stay, C-reactive protein value on the first postoperative day, number of lymph nodes dissected, postoperative pathological or TN staging between the two groups (P &gt; 0.05), the postoperative exhaust time in the ICG fluorescence imaging group was shorter than that in the control group, and the difference was</p><table-wrap id="table1" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table1">Table 1</xref></label><caption><title> Characteristics of patients</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >Variables</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >ICG group (n = 52)</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Control group (n = 57)</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >P value</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Male:Female</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >33:19</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >26:31</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.062</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Age (years)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >61.85 &#177; 9.82</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >62.21 &#177; 11.45</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.861</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >ASA score (≥3)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >35 (67.31%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >34 (59.65%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.407</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >BMI (≥25 kg/m<sup>2</sup>)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >15 (28.85%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >20 (35.09%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.486</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Clinical T status 3 - 4</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >41 (78.85%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >44 (77.19%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.835</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Smoking history</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >17 (32.69%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >13 (22.81%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.248</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Diabetes</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6 (11.54%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4 (7.02%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.514</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Neoadjuvant therapy</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5 (9.62%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5 (8.77%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.879</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Previous abdominal surgery</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >10 (19.23%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >11 (19.30%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.993</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Tumor distance from anal verge (cm)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7.91 &#177; 3.30</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >8.12 &#177; 3.29</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.740</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><table-wrap id="table2" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table2">Table 2</xref></label><caption><title> Tumor and operative characteristics</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >Variables</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >ICG group (n = 52)</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Control group (n = 57)</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >P value</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Intraoperative blood loss(ml)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >48.27 &#177; 17.35</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >54.21 &#177; 20.78</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.110</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Operation time (min)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >206.67 &#177; 43.66</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >217.09 &#177; 59.81</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.305</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Postoperative anal gas evacuation time (d)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.69 &#177; 0.81</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.14 &#177; 0.77</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.004</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Postoperative hospital stay (d)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >9.98 &#177; 4.00</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >10.06 &#177; 5.72</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.933</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >CRP level on the first day after surgery (mg/L)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >31.47 &#177; 28.29</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >29.22 &#177; 23.72</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.653</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Number of dissected lymph nodes (n)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >13.88 &#177; 6.67</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >12.23 &#177; 4.44</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.128</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Pathological T status 3 - 4</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >37 (71.15%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >41 (71.93%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.929</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><p>statistically significant (P &lt; 0.05) (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table2">Table 2</xref>).</p></sec><sec id="s3_2"><title>3.2. Comparison of Postoperative Complications</title><p>There were no postoperative deaths in either group of patients, and no patients with indocyanine green allergy were found in the ICG fluorescence imaging group. No anastomotic leakage occurred in the ICG fluorescence imaging group. However, 3 patients in the control group developed anastomotic leakage, which was cured and discharged after conservative treatment. There was no anastomotic bleeding in the ICG fluorescence imaging group and 1 case in the control group. There was no patient with intestinal obstruction in the ICG fluorescence imaging group. Two patients in the control group developed intestinal obstruction. They were cured and discharged after conservative treatment, considering postoperative inflammatory intestinal obstruction. There was 1 case of abdominal infection in the ICG fluorescence imaging group and 3 cases of abdominal infection in the control group. There was 1 case of incision infection in each of the two groups; 1 case in the ICG fluorescence imaging group developed urinary retention, and 2 cases in the control group experienced urinary retention. The total incidence of postoperative complications in the ICG fluorescence imaging group was 5.78%, which was lower than that in the control group, which was 21.05% (p &lt; 0.05) (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table3">Table 3</xref>).</p></sec><sec id="s3_3"><title>3.3. Subgroup Analysis in the ICG Fluoroscopy Group</title><p>In the ICG fluorescence imaging group, before the proximal bowel of the lesion was severed, the scope of the proximal bowel resection was adjusted in time when the intestinal blood supply was insufficiently assessed by fluorescence imaging. Based on this, fifty-two patients were divided into two subgroups, fluorescence-adjusted and nonadjusted, according to whether near margin adjustment was performed during the operation and analyzed and compared into two subgroups. The results showed no differences in sex, age, anesthesia classification (ASA), body mass index (BMI), clinicopathological stage, smoking history, diabetes history, neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy history, or abdominal surgery</p><table-wrap id="table3" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table3">Table 3</xref></label><caption><title> Postoperative complications</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >Variables</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >ICG group (n = 52)</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Control group (n = 57)</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >P value</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Postoperative complications, n (%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3 (5.78%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >12 (21.05%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.021</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Anastomotic leak</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Anastomotic bleeding</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Bowel obstruction</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Abdominal infection</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Surgical incision infection</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Urinary retention</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >ICG allergy</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Reoperation, n</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Mortality, n</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><table-wrap id="table4" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table4">Table 4</xref></label><caption><title> Factors associated with the adjustment of transection sites</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >Variables</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >adjustment group (n = 23)</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >non-adjustment group (n = 29)</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >P value</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Male:Female</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >13:10</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >20:9</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.355</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Age (years)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >62.91 &#177; 10.48</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >61.00 &#177; 9.36</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.317</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >ASA score (≥3)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >13 (52.17%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >22 (79.31%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.140</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >BMI (≥25 kg/m<sup>2</sup>)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6 (26.09%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >9 (31.03%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.696</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Pathological T status 3 - 4</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >14 (60.88%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >23 (79.31%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.145</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Smoking history</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6 (26.09%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >11 (37.93%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.366</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Diabetes</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1 (4.35%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5 (17.24%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.210</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Neoadjuvant therapy</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2 (8.70%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3 (10.34%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.841</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Previous abdominal surgery</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3 (13.04%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7 (24.14%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.482</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Tumor distance from anal verge (cm)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5.39 &#177; 1.97</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >9.91 &#177; 2.72</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >P &lt; 0.001</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><p>history between the two subgroups of patients. However, the distance from the tumor to the anus in the fluorescence-adjusted group was smaller than that in the nonadjusted group, and the difference was statistically significant (P &lt; 0.01) (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table4">Table 4</xref>).</p></sec></sec><sec id="s4"><title>4. Discussion</title><p>Anastomotic leakage has been one of the most important postoperative complications in colorectal surgery for a long time. Insufficient blood supply to the anastomotic stoma is the most critical factor for anastomotic leakage in colorectal cancer surgery. Minimizing the risk of anastomotic leakage is an essential goal pursued by intestinal surgeons. In traditional laparoscopic surgery, the surgeon’s method of assessing the intestinal stump blood supply is mainly performed with the naked eye. For example, during the operation, the surgeon observes whether the color of the bowel is ruddy, whether there is active bleeding at the incision margin, whether the mesenteric vascular arch is complete, and whether there is a fluctuation of the mesenteric blood vessels. However, intraoperative observation methods have certain subjectivity and blindness. In addition, the judgment of the blood supply of anastomosis is time-consuming and lacks accuracy [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.119512-ref8">8</xref>].</p><p>Indocyanine green (ICG), a medical water-soluble fluorescent dye that isnontoxic to the human body and has good affinity, has near-infrared absorption and fluorescence emission characteristics. It can emit visible fluorescence that can be monitored. At present, ICG has been widely used in the visualization of the cardiovascular system, retina and choroid, ophthalmology, and cerebral angiography [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.119512-ref11">11</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.119512-ref12">12</xref>]. In addition to organ function testing and vascular imaging, ICG has recently been increasingly used to assess blood perfusion and tumor imaging. The clinical application of ICG fluorescence imaging technology in colorectal cancer surgery is increasing, bringing great benefits to colorectal surgery [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.119512-ref13">13</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.119512-ref14">14</xref>]. As a simple and effective method for evaluating tissue perfusion in laparoscopic surgery, ICG fluorescence imaging technology can display the blood perfusion of the tissue in real-time during the operation. Furthermore, it has the advantage of indocyanine green in white light mode without coloration. The drug is cheap, safe, nontoxic, and guaranteed operations such as lesion resection and lymph node dissection in routine laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.119512-ref15">15</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.119512-ref16">16</xref>]. A multicenter cohort study showed that the application of ICG fluorescence imaging technology in colorectal cancer is safe and reliable. This technology significantly reduces the incidence of laparoscopic colorectal cancer anastomotic leakage and the rate of unplanned surgery [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.119512-ref17">17</xref>].</p><p>A total of 109 patients who underwent laparoscopic radical resection of rectal cancer were included in this study. They were divided into an ICG fluorescence imaging group and a control group according to whether ICG real-time blood flow perfusion fluorescence imaging was performed during the operation. The two groups of patients were comparable in terms of general data, such as sex, age, anesthesia grade (ASA), body mass index, preoperative stage (BMI), smoking history, history of diabetes, history of neoadjuvant radiotherapy and chemotherapy, history of abdominal surgery, and distance from the tumor to the anus. All the patients in the two groups completed radical resection of rectal cancer under laparoscopy. There were no conversions to laparotomy and no deaths. Our study found that although there were no differences in intraoperative blood loss, operation time, postoperative hospital stay, C-reactive protein value on the first postoperative day, number of lymph node dissections, postoperative pathological and TN staging between the two groups, the postoperative anal exhaust time in the ICG fluorescence imaging group was less than that in the control group. This indicates that the application of ICG fluorescence imaging in rectal cancer is safe and reliable and has the potential advantage of quick recovery of bowel function. The study analyzed the postoperative complications of the two groups of patients and found no patients with secondary surgery in either group. The main complications were intestinal obstruction, incision infection, abdominal infection, anastomotic leakage, anastomotic bleeding, etc. There were 3 cases of anastomotic leakage in the control group; compared with that, there was no anastomotic leakage in the ICG fluorescence imaging group. However, this study failed to show a significant difference. Considering that it is mainly related to the number of cases and that blood perfusion is only one of the main factors leading to anastomotic leakage, other factors, such as intestinal tension, cannot be ignored. Similar conclusions were drawn by Kawada et al., who noted that those who underwent anterior rectal resection had a 12% incidence of clinical anastomotic leakage, similar to their historical cohort [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.119512-ref18">18</xref>]. Kin et al. showed no difference in anastomotic leak rates in their case-matched comparisons [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.119512-ref19">19</xref>]. However, our study found that the total incidence of postoperative complications in the ICG fluorescence imaging group was significantly lower than in the control group. The analysis may be related to the reduction of complications such as inflammatory bowel obstruction and abdominal infection caused by potential anastomotic leakage by ICG fluorescence imaging.</p><p>In addition, in patients with ICG fluorescence imaging, we adjusted the proximal resection of the bowel on time when the intraoperative assessment found that the intestinal blood supply was insufficient. Accordingly, patients with ICG fluorescence imaging were divided into two subgroups, fluorescence-adjusted and nonadjusted, according to whether near-margin adjustment was performed during surgery, and the two groups were analyzed. The results showed no significant differences in sex, age, anesthesia grade (ASA), body mass index (BMI), clinicopathological stage, smoking history, diabetes history, neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy history, or abdominal surgery history between the two subgroups. However, the distance from the tumor to the anus in the fluorescence-adjusted group was significantly smaller than that in the nonadjusted group, and the difference was statistically significant. This also illustrates the unreliability of routine macroscopic perfusion assessment in mid-low rectal cancer surgery. The distance between the tumor and the anal verge is an essential factor. The closer the tumor is to the anus, the longer the length of the proximal bowel remains, the easier it is to reduce the bowel’s blood supply, and the more likely anastomotic leakage occurs. These patients may need more ICG fluorescence imaging to determine the blood supply of the anastomosis. Previous studies also showed that the incidence of anastomotic leakage was significantly reduced by half in the fluorescence group (19% vs. 9%); in particular, the number of grades A fistulas decreased, while the total number of clinically manifested grade B and C fistulas did not differ between groups. ICG fluorescence application may further reduce the occurrence of subclinical fistulas, which may lead to increased postoperative complications, such as abdominal infection, incomplete intestinal obstruction, and the slow recovery of postoperative intestinal function [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.119512-ref20">20</xref>]. This also explains the low postoperative complications and short anal ventilation time in the ICG fluorescence imaging group in our study. The above research shows that patients with tumors located closer to the anus are more likely to benefit more from ICG fluorescence.</p><p>However, most current studies comparing ICG fluorescein angiography with routine assessment are based on the characterization of ICG fluorescence in the colon wall or mucosa [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.119512-ref21">21</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.119512-ref22">22</xref>]. However, qualitative evaluation may have a certain bias in accurately distinguishing the changes in colorectal microcirculation. There are very little data using quantitative analysis in the literature. Studies have found that quantitative blood flow analysis may better measure changes in colonic blood flow and microcirculation [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.119512-ref23">23</xref>]. Animal experiments and clinical studies using fluorescence imaging have shown that decreased microcirculation leads to intestinal necrosis. However, the results of quantitative analysis are affected by the patient’s perfusion state and by the characteristics of the fluorescence camera system and the video recording conditions. Moreover, the accessibility of equipment in most hospitals is poor, and fluorescence qualitative analysis is still the main method with strong popularity [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.119512-ref24">24</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.119512-ref25">25</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.119512-ref26">26</xref>]. Therefore, further multi-institutional and large-sample clinical studies are needed in the future to confirm the clinical effect of ICG fluorescence technology. The results of this study will provide a solid foundation for further research in the future.</p></sec><sec id="s5"><title>5. Conclusion</title><p>In traditional laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery, the surgeon’s method assess intestinal stumps blood supply is time-consuming and lacks accuracy. ICG real-time indocyanine green fluorescence angiography can guarantee a rapid and reliable anastomosis during laparoscopic radical resection of rectal cancer. This technique reduced postoperative anal ventilation time and postoperative complications to a certain extent and is especially suitable for patients with lower rectal cancer. Further prospective randomized controlled trials from multiple centers with larger sample sizes and longer follow-up periods may confirm that ICG can decrease the rate of postoperative complications and thereby improve outcomes of colorectal cancer surgery.</p></sec><sec id="s6"><title>Funding Information</title><p>This study was supported by a Grant from the Chongqing medical scientific research project (Joint project of Chongqing Health Commission and Science and Technology Bureau) (No. 2021MSXM309).</p></sec><sec id="s7"><title>Conflicts of Interest</title><p>The authors declare no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this paper.</p></sec><sec id="s8"><title>Cite this paper</title><p>Shang, J.K., He, J.P., Zhang, S.R., Tang, M.C., Zheng, Z.L. and Sun, H. (2022) Efficacy of the Intraoperative Use of Indocyanine-Green Fluorescence Angiography in Laparoscopic Rectal Resections. Journal of Cancer Therapy, 13, 549-560. https://doi.org/10.4236/jct.2022.139049</p></sec><sec id="s9"><title>NOTES</title></sec></body><back><ref-list><title>References</title><ref id="scirp.119512-ref1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Bray, F., Ferlay, J., Soerjomataram, I., Siegel, R.L., Torre, L.A. and Jemal, A. (2018) Global Cancer Statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN Estimates of Incidence and Mortality Worldwide for 36 Cancers in 185 Countries [Published Correction Appears in CA Cancer J Clin. 2020 Jul; 70(4): 313]. CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians, 68, 394-424.  
https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21492</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.119512-ref2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Rausa, E., Kelly, M.E., Asti, E., Aiolfi, A., Bonitta, G. and Bonavina, L. (2019) Right Hemicolectomy: A Network Meta-Analysis Comparing Open, Laparoscopic-Assisted, Total Laparoscopic, and Robotic Approach. Surgical Endoscopy, 33, 1020-1032.  
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-018-6592-3</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.119512-ref3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Pommergaard, H.C., Gessler, B., Burcharth, J., Angenete, E., Haglind, E. and Rosenberg, J. (2014) Preoperative Risk Factors for Anastomotic Leakage after Resection for Colorectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Colorectal Disease, 16, 662-671. https://doi.org/10.1111/codi.12618</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.119512-ref4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">McDermott, F.D., Heeney, A., Kelly, M.E., Steele, R.J., Carlson, G. and Winter, D.C. (2015) Systematic Review of Preoperative, Intraoperative and Postoperative Risk Factors for Colorectal Anastomotic Leaks. British Journal of Surgery, 102, 462-479.  
https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.9697</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.119512-ref5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Mirnezami, A., Mirnezami, R., Chandrakumaran, K., Sasapu, K., Sagar, P. and Finan, P. (2011) Increased Local Recurrence and Reduced Survival from Colorectal Cancer Following Anastomotic Leak: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Annals of Surgery, 253, 890-899. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0b013e3182128929</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.119512-ref6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Choi, H.K., Law, W.L. and Ho, J.W. (2006) Leakage after Resection and Intraperitoneal Anastomosis for Colorectal Malignancy: Analysis of Risk Factors. Diseases of the Colon &amp; Rectum, 49, 1719-1725. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10350-006-0703-2</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.119512-ref7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Ito, M., Sugito, M., Kobayashi, A., Nishizawa, Y., Tsunoda, Y. and Saito, N. (2008) Relationship between Multiple Numbers of Stapler Firings during Rectal Division and Anastomotic Leakage after Laparoscopic Rectal Resection. International Journal of Colorectal Disease, 23, 703-707. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00384-008-0470-8</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.119512-ref8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Karliczek, A., Harlaar, N.J., Zeebregts, C.J., Wiggers, T., Baas, P.C. and van Dam, G.M. (2009) Surgeons Lack Predictive Accuracy for Anastomotic Leakage in Gastro-intestinal Surgery. International Journal of Colorectal Disease, 24, 569-576.  
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00384-009-0658-6</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.119512-ref9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Yeung, T.M. (2021) Fluorescence Imaging in Colorectal Surgery. Surgical Endoscopy, 35, 4956-4963. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-021-08534-7</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.119512-ref10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Watanabe, J., Ishibe, A., Suwa, Y., et al. (2020) Indocyanine Green Fluorescence Imaging to Reduce the Risk of Anastomotic Leakage in Laparoscopic Low Anterior Resection for Rectal Cancer: A Propensity Score-Matched Cohort Study. Surgical Endoscopy, 34, 202-208. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-019-06751-9</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.119512-ref11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Aslim, E.J., Lee, F.J. and Gan, V.H.L. (2018) The Utility of Intraoperative near Infrared Fluorescence (NIR) Imaging with Indocyanine Green (ICG) for the Assessment of Kidney Allograft Perfusion. Journal of Transplantation, 2018, Article ID: 6703056.  
https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/6703056</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.119512-ref12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">DSouza, A.V., Lin, H., Henderson, E.R., Samkoe, K.S. and Pogue, B.W. (2016) Review of Fluorescence Guided Surgery Systems: Identification of Key Performance Capabilities beyond Indocyanine Green Imaging. Journal of Biomedical Optics, 21, Article ID: 80901. https://doi.org/10.1117/1.JBO.21.8.080901</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.119512-ref13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Son, G.M., Kwon, M.S., Kim, Y., Kim, J., Kim, S.H. and Lee, J.W. (2019) Quantitative Analysis of Colon Perfusion Pattern Using Indocyanine Green (ICG) Angiography in Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgery. Surgical Endoscopy, 33, 1640-1649.  
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-018-6439-y</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.119512-ref14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">De Nardi, P., Elmore, U., Maggi, G., et al. (2020) Intraoperative Angiography with Indocyanine Green to Assess Anastomosis Perfusion in Patients Undergoing Laparoscopic Colorectal Resection: Results of a Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial. Surgical Endoscopy, 34, 53-60. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-019-06730-0</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.119512-ref15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Peltrini, R., Podda, M., Castiglioni, S., et al. (2021) Intraoperative Use of Indocyanine Green Fluorescence Imaging in Rectal Cancer Surgery: The State of the Art. World Journal of Gastroenterology, 27, 6374-6386.  
https://doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v27.i38.6374</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.119512-ref16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Zhou, S.C., Tian, Y.T., Wang, X.W., et al. (2019) Application of Indocyanine Green-Enhanced Near-Infrared Fluorescence-Guided Imaging in Laparoscopic Lateral Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection for Middle-Low Rectal Cancer. World Journal of Gastroenterology, 25, 4502-4511. https://doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v25.i31.4502</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.119512-ref17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Blanco-Colino, R. and Espin-Basany, E. (2018) Intraoperative Use of ICG Fluorescence Imaging to Reduce the Risk of Anastomotic Leakage in Colorectal Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Techniques in Coloproctology, 22, 15-23.  
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10151-017-1731-8</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.119512-ref18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Wada, T., Kawada, K., Takahashi, R., et al. (2017) ICG Fluorescence Imaging for Quantitative Evaluation of Colonic Perfusion in Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgery. Surgical Endoscopy, 31, 4184-4193. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-017-5475-3</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.119512-ref19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Kin, C., Vo, H., Welton, L. and Welton, M. (2015) Equivocal Effect of Intraoperative Fluorescence Angiography on Colorectal Anastomotic Leaks. Diseases of the Colon &amp; Rectum, 58, 582-587. https://doi.org/10.1097/DCR.0000000000000320</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.119512-ref20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Bencurik, V., Skrovina, M., Martínek, L., et al. (2021) Intraoperative Fluorescence Angiography and Risk Factors of Anastomotic Leakage in Mini-Invasive Low Rectal Resections. Surgical Endoscopy, 35, 5015-5023.  
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-020-07982-x</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.119512-ref21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Jafari, M.D., Wexner, S.D., Martz, J.E., et al. (2015) Perfusion Assessment in Laparoscopic Left-Sided/Anterior Resection (PILLAR II): A Multi-Institutional Study. Journal of the American College of Surgeons, 220, 82-92.e1.  
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2014.09.015</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.119512-ref22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Boni, L., David, G., Dionigi, G., Rausei, S., Cassinotti, E. and Fingerhut, A. (2016) Indocyanine Green-Enhanced Fluorescence to Assess Bowel Perfusion during Laparoscopic Colorectal Resection. Surgical Endoscopy, 30, 2736-2742.  
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-015-4540-z</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.119512-ref23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Gr&amp;ouml;ne, J., Koch, D. and Kreis, M.E. (2015) Impact of Intraoperative Microperfusion Assessment with Pinpoint Perfusion Imaging on Surgical Management of Laparoscopic Low Rectal and Anorectal Anastomoses. Colorectal Disease, 17, 22-28.  
https://doi.org/10.1111/codi.13031</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.119512-ref24"><label>24</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Diana, M., Noll, E., Diemunsch, P., et al. (2014) Enhanced-Reality Video Fluorescence: A Real-Time Assessment of Intestinal Viability. Annals of Surgery, 259, 700-707. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0b013e31828d4ab3</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.119512-ref25"><label>25</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Law, W.L. and Chu, K.W. (2004) Anterior Resection for Rectal Cancer with Mesorectal Excision: A Prospective Evaluation of 622 Patients. Annals of Surgery, 240, 260-268. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.sla.0000133185.23514.32</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.119512-ref26"><label>26</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Chang, Y.K., Foo, C.C., Yip, J., et al. (2019) The Impact of Indocyanine-Green Fluorescence Angiogram on Colorectal Resection. Surgeon, 17, 270-276.  
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surge.2018.08.006</mixed-citation></ref></ref-list></back></article>