Is axillary reverse mapping feasible in breast cancer patients?

Lymph Node Positivity of Axillary Reverse Mapping Lymph Nodes at the Time of Axillary Lymph Node Dissection: Two-Site Prospective Trial

BACKGROUND

Axillary reverse mapping (ARM) was introduced in 2007 to identify and selectively preserve upper-extremity lymphatics during axillary lymph node surgery to decrease the risk of lymphedema. The patient population in which an ARM lymph node (LN) can be preserved during an axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) has not been established to date. This study aimed to determine the frequency of metastatic involvement of an ARM LN among patients undergoing ALND.

METHODS

Patients undergoing ALND with or without immediate lymphatic reconstruction (ILR) were enrolled in a prospective trial at two institutional sites between April 2018 and Decemeber 2022. This report analyzes the ARM node positivity and total LN positivity rates during ALND for the cohort of patients enrolled in the ILR intervention arm of the study.

RESULTS

The inclusion criteria were met by 139 patients, who made up the study population (133 with breast cancer and 6 with other disease). Of the breast cancer patients, 99.2% were female, 35.3% (47/133) were cT3 or greater, and 96.2% (128/133) had cN1 or greater disease. For 55 of the 133 patients (41.4%), the ARM nodes were marked and specified in the pathology report. Of the 55 patients, 39 (70.9%) had a positive LN at ALND. Of these 55 patients, 11 (20%) had positive ARM nodes. The ARM LN was the only positive node in 3 of the 11 patients.

CONCLUSION

In the contemporary patient population undergoing ALND, the positivity rate of the ARM LN was relatively high, suggesting that leaving ARM LNs in patients undergoing ALND may not be oncologically safe.

The involvement of axillary reverse mapping nodes in patients with node-positive breast cancer

INTRODUCTION

Axillary reverse mapping (ARM) procedure is useful in reducing lymphedema. However, concerns regarding oncologic safety have limited the adoption of the ARM procedure. This study aimed to evaluate the involvement of ARM nodes in node-positive breast cancer patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Two hundred twenty-three node-positive patients were enrolled in this study: 90 were clinically node-negative, but had one or more positive sentinel lymph nodes (SLNs) (SLN-positive group); 68 were clinicopathologically node-positive (CpN-positive group); and 65 had confirmed nodal involvement and received neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) (NAC group). All patients underwent axillary lymph node dissection with fluorescent ARM.

RESULTS

ARM nodes were involved in 33 (36.7%) patients of the SLN-group. Residual ARM nodes after SLN biopsy were involved in 11 patients (12.2%), including 5 patients (19.2%) with crossover type nodes and 6 patients (9.4%) with non-crossover type nodes. However, the difference in involvement rates between the two types was not high enough to be significant. Of these 11 patients, moreover, four patients had three or more than 3 involved SLNs. On the other hand, the involvement rate of ARM nodes in the NAC group was significantly lower than that of the CpN-positive group (35.4% vs. 64.7%: p < 0.01). Despite lower involvement, the risk of metastases in the ARM nodes was still too high to spare ARM nodes in both the NAC group and CpN-positive group.

CONCLUSIONS

Suspicious or involved ARM nodes should be removed even when detected in ARM procedure, particularly in NAC-group and CpN-positive-group patients.

Axillary Reverse Mapping in the Prevention of Lymphoedema: A Systematic Review and Pooled Analysis

BACKGROUND

This is a systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCT) comparing the use of axillary reverse mapping (ARM) with conventional technique for axillary dissection (AD) in breast cancer surgery.

METHODS

This review was written in line with the PRISMA protocol. Articles were retrieved from PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL and Cochrane databases, using keywords ..úaxillary reverse mapping..Ñ and "axillary lymph node dissection". Non-RCT were excluded. Abstracts were screened independently by 2 reviewers. Data from eligible studies were retrieved for qualitative synthesis and pooled analysis. 73 publications were identified for initial screening.

RESULTS

68 articles were excluded from analysis according to the pre-defined systematic review protocol. 5 RCTS with 1696 subjects were included for analysis. 802 patients received ARM, 894 patients received AD. Pooled ARM node detection rate was 84.9% (Range 79.2 - 94.9%). There was a lower rate of post-operative lymphedema in ARM group patients across all 5 RCTs. The pooled lymphedema incidence in the ARM group was 4.8% (37/766) when compared to 18.8% (164/873) in the AD group (P < .0001). Axillary recurrence rate with median followof 37 months was 1.03% (8/778) in the ARM group, which was identical to 1.03% (9/870) in the AD group (P = 1).

CONCLUSION

ARM resulted in decreased incidence of lymphedema. There was no significant increase in axillary recurrence at 37 months post-operation.

Triple mapping for axillary staging after neoadjuvant therapy: Axillary reverse mapping with indocyanine green and dual agent sentinel lymph node biopsy

Axillary staging is 1 of the major issues of current breast cancer management after neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NST). Sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) is an option for clinically node negative patients. Axillary reverse mapping (ARM) was introduced to identify and preserve the lymphatic drainage from the arm. The aim of the presented study is to employ triple mapping (radiocolloid, blue dye and indocyanine green [ICG]) to assess the crossover rate and metastatic involvement of ARM nodes after NST. Clinically node positive patients before NST who were converted to N0 and scheduled for targeted axillary dissection were included. sentinel lymph node (SLN) mapping was performed via dual agent mapping. ICG was used for ARM procedure. Blue, hot and fluorescent nodes and lymphatics were visualized in the axilla using infrared camera system and dual opto-nuclear probe (Euoroprobe3). Fifty-two patients underwent targeted axillary dissection and ARM procedures 12 out of whom had axillary node dissection. 45 of the 52 patients had at least 1 hot or blue SLN identified intraoperatively. Of these, 61.5% cases had hot SLNs, 42.3% had hot and blue, 15.4% had hot/blue/fluorescent, 7.7% had blue/fluorescent, 6 11.5% had hot/fluorescent and 7 13.5% had only clipped nodes. The overall identification rate of ARM-nodes by means of ICG technique was 86.5%. Overall crossover of ARM nodes with SLNs was determined in 36.5%. The ICG intensity was found to be higher in both hot and blue SLNS (8 out of 18 ICG positive cases, 44.4%). In 3 of 52 patients (5.7%) metastatic SLNs were hot or blue but fluorescent which predicts metastatic involvement of the ARM-nodes. More than 1-third of the patients revealed a crossover between arm and breast draining nodes. The higher observed rate of overlap might partially explain why more patients develop clinically significant lymphedema after NST even after sentinel lymph node biopsy alone. The triple mapping provides valuable data regarding the competency of lymphatic drainage and would have the potential to serve selecting patients for lymphovenous by-pass procedures at the index procedure. NST reduces the metastatic involvement of the ARM nodes. However, conservative axillary staging with sparing ARM nodes after NST necessitates further studies with larger sample size and longer follow-up.

The involvement of axillary reverse mapping nodes in patients with clinically node-negative breast cancer

BACKGROUND

Axillary reverse mapping (ARM) was developed to preserve the lymphatic drainage from the upper arm during sentinel lymph-node (SLN) biopsy or axillary lymph-node dissection (ALND). However, the oncological safety of ARM has been controversial because of not infrequent involvement of ARM nodes.

METHODS

Patients with clinically negative nodes (cN0) underwent SLN biopsy and ARM. SLNs were identified using blue dye and radioisotope, and ARM nodes were traced using the fluorescent method. Patients with positive SLN underwent the standard ALND. After surgery, they were followed up for more than 3 years.

RESULTS

A total of 507 patients with cN0 breast cancer were enrolled between May 2009 and November 2017. SLNs were identified in 499 (98%) of 507 patients, and ARM nodes were identified in 159 (31%) patients in the SLN field. The crossover rate of SLN-ARM nodes was 28%. Among 95 patients with positive SLNs, 70 patients underwent conventional ALND. ARM nodes were identified in 65 (93%) of those patients in the ALND field. The mean number of removed ARM nodes was 7.2 (range 0-25) in patients who underwent the standard ALND. Although ARM nodes were involved in 18 of 65 patients, the involved ARM nodes were the same SLNs identified in 14 (78%) patients. Since SLN-ARM nodes should be removed, ARM nodes were involved only in 4 (5.7%) patients after SLN biopsy.

CONCLUSIONS

Except for positive SLN-ARM nodes, the involvement of ARM nodes is infrequent in patients with positive SLN.

The role of axillary reverse mapping in intraoperative nodal palpation during sentinel lymph node biopsy

Intraoperative nodal palpation in the axilla is a mandatory part of sentinel lymph node biopsy. However, there is no consensus regarding the definition of suspicious palpable node. The sampling rate and involvement rate of suspicious palpable nodes are inconsistent. We hypothesized that axillary reverse mapping is helpful to select suspicious palpable sentinel lymph nodes more accurately. Patients with clinically negative nodes underwent sentinel lymph node biopsy with intraoperative nodal palpation and axillary reverse mapping. Blue and hot nodes were removed as sentinel lymph nodes. Suspicious palpable nodes that were neither blue nor hot were removed as palpable sentinel lymph nodes. Nodes around blue and hot sentinel lymph node were incidentally removed as para-sentinel lymph nodes. Fluorescent nodes were considered axillary reverse mapping nodes. Patients with positive sentinel lymph node underwent axillary lymph node dissection. Palpable sentinel lymph nodes and para-sentinel lymph nodes were removed in 130 (15%) of 850 patients with clinically negative nodes. Although palpable sentinel lymph nodes and para-sentinel lymph nodes were involved in 19 (15%) of 130 patients, fluorescent palpable sentinel lymph nodes were involved only in 2 patients and fluorescent para-sentinel lymph nodes were not involved. When excluding fluorescent palpable sentinel lymph nodes and para-sentinel lymph nodes, the sampling rate of suspicious palpable nodes significantly decreased (15% vs. 5%, p < 0.01) and the involvement rate of palpable sentinel lymph nodes significantly increased (15% vs. 31%, p < 0.05). Axillary reverse mapping is helpful to avoid an unnecessary removal of palpable nodes without metastases.

Axillary surgery for breast cancer: past, present, and future

In breast cancer surgery, there has been a major shift toward less invasive local treatment. Although axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) was an integral part of surgical treatment for breast cancer, sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy was developed as an accurate method for axillary staging. ALND can be avoided not only in patients with negative SLNs but also in those with one or two positive SLNs receiving breast and/or axillary radiation. On the other hand, ALND has remained the standard treatment for patients with clinically positive nodes. However, axillary reverse mapping (ARM) was developed to map and preserve arm lymphatic drainage during ALND and/or SLN biopsy. This procedure allowed reduction of the rate of arm lymphedema without increasing axillary recurrence, although patients receive postoperative chemotherapy and high-risk patients undergo axillary radiation. Standard ALND may not be necessary even for patients with clinically positive nodes who receive axillary radiation and systemic therapy. Thus, the extent of axillary surgery in breast cancer has been decreased with increased use of systemic and radiation therapy.

Oncological safety of selective axillary dissection after axillary reverse mapping in node-positive breast cancer

INTRODUCTION

Although the need for axillary lymph node dissection (AD) is decreasing in breast cancer patients, it remains necessary in some cases. Axillary reverse mapping (ARM) enables the detection of upper extremity lymphatic drainage that may be spared during selective axillary dissection (SAD) so as to reduce the risk of lymphedema. The ability of the ARM-SAD procedure to reduce the incidence of lymphedema is being tested in an ongoing randomized trial. Crossover between arm drainage and breast drainage is well documented in the axilla, however, and whether the procedure is oncologically safe remains controversial. We aim to assess the axillary failure rate when a few nodes draining the upper arm are being spared by the ARM-SAD.

METHODS

We report oncological outcomes, and axillary failure in particular, in the first 100 consecutive axillary node-positive patients treated with ARM-SAD as part of a pilot study and a randomized trial.

RESULTS

A median of 18 (IQR 14-22) axillary nodes were excised per patient. During the follow-up (median 51 months, IQR 34-91), 11 patients experienced a treatment failure, but only one - treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy - developed overt axillary disease as a first (and isolated) event. The crude rate of axillary failure was 1.36% (95% CI: 0.19-9.63) with an estimated 5-year crude cumulative incidence of 1.85% (95% CI: 0-5.47%).

CONCLUSIONS

The axillary failure rate was low in our patients and did not exceed rates reported in the literature after standard AD, thus indicating that the ARM-SAD procedure is oncologically safe.

Comparison of indocyanine green and methylene blue use for axillary reverse mapping during axillary lymph node dissection

Axillary reverse mapping (ARM) is a technique to identify arm lymphatic drainage during axillary lymph node dissection (ALND). This study compared the feasibility of ARM using indocyanine green (ICG) or methylene blue (MB), and accessed the oncologic safety of the procedure. Overall, 158 patients qualified for ALND were enrolled. The characteristics of ARM-identified nodes were recorded with ICG (n = 78) or MB (n = 80) visualization. Fine-needle aspiration cytology (FNAC) of the nodes were performed and validated by histologic analysis. The nodal identification rate in the ICG group significantly surpassed that of the MB group (87.2% vs 52.5%, P < .05) with fewer complications. Note that 10.9% of the patients had metastatic involvement of the ARM-identified nodes. Also 80% of the positive nodes were found in areas B and D, while the ARM-identified nodes mainly located in area A. All the 51 nodes diagnosed as negative of malignancy by FNAC were free of metastasis. Nodal metastasis was significantly correlated with extensive nodel involvement, advanced disease, and the characteristics of identified nodes. In conclusion, ICG appears superior to MB for ARM nodes identification. FNAC, together with the features of primary tumors and ARM nodes, can delineate which nodes could be preserved during ALND.

Axillary reverse mapping in patients undergoing axillary dissection -a short review of the literature

Axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) can be avoided not only in patients with negative sentinel lymph nodes (SLNs) but also in those with one or two positive SLNs receiving breast or axillary radiation. However, ALND has remained the standard treatment for patients with clinically positive nodes (cN+). Although axillary reverse mapping (ARM) was developed to map and preserve arm lymphatic drainage during ALND, it could not be indicated for cN + patients because metastatic rate of ARM nodes is high. However, a new type of conservative ALND with ARM attempts to preserve ARM lymphatics and nodes except SLNs and other suspicious palpable nodes, including suspicious ARM nodes. This procedure allowed reduction of the rate of arm lymphedema without increasing axillary recurrence, although patients received postoperative chemotherapy and high-risk patients underwent axillary radiation. Thus, a traditional full ALND may not be necessary for cN + patients in the era of effective multimodality therapy.

Conserving the lymphatics from the arm using fluorescence imaging in patients with breast cancer at high risk of postoperative lymphedema: a pilot study

Background

Postoperative lymphedema in breast cancer survivors is a serious complication that develops from axillary lymph node dissection (ALND), chemotherapy, and radiation therapy. Axillary reverse mapping (ARM) was recently introduced to reduce lymphedema. This pilot study aimed to investigate the feasibility of preserving the ARM node using fluorescence imaging for patients at high risk of lymphedema.

Methods

We prospectively screened patients with breast cancer who had pathologic node-positive disease at diagnosis and were scheduled for neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT). The sentinel lymph node (SLN) was identified using blue dye and radioisotope, while the ARM node was traced using indocyanine green (ICG). In cases in which SLN was negative on the intraoperative frozen section examination, the ARM node and lymphatics were preserved.

Results

Of the 20 screened patients, six whose metastatic axillary lymph node (ALN) was converted to clinically node-negative disease after NCT were enrolled. No patients experienced recurrence at 24 months postoperative. Four patients who had a preserved ARM node did not develop lymphedema. One patient whose ARM node was not preserved due to SLN identification failure did not develop postoperative lymphedema. One patient who underwent ALND without ARM node conservation because of metastatic SLN on frozen section examination developed postoperative lymphedema.

Conclusions

ARM is oncologically safe, decreases the incidence of postoperative lymphedema, and allows for the early detection of postoperative lymphedema in patients who underwent ALND. Ultimately, ARM may help improve the quality of life of patients with pathologic node-positive breast cancer.

Near-infrared fluorescence imaging for the prevention and management of breast cancer-related lymphedema: A systematic review

Sentinel lymph node identification by near infrared (NIR) fluorescence with indocyanine green (ICG) is recognized in the literature as a useful technique. NIR fluorescence technology could become key in the prevention and management of lymphedema after axillary dissection for breast cancer. Here, we conducted a systematic review focusing on ICG imaging to improve lymphedema prevention and treatment after axillary surgery. A systematic literature review was performed using MEDLINE and Embase to identify articles focused on ICG imaging for breast-cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL). Qualitative analysis was performed to summarize the characteristics of reported ICG procedures. In situ tissue identification and functionality assessment based on fluorescence signal were evaluated. Clinical outcomes were appraised when reported. Studies relating to axillary reverse mapping, lymphography and upper limb supermicrosurgery combined with ICG imaging were identified. We included a total of 33 relevant articles with a total of 2016 patients enrolled. ICG imaging for axillary reverse mapping was safe for all 951 included patients, with identification of arm nodes in 80%-88% of patients with axillary lymph nodes dissection. However, the papers discuss the oncologic safety of the approach and how - regardless of the contrast agent - concerns limit its adoption. ICG lymphography is openly supported in BCRL management, with 1065 patients undergoing this procedure in 26 articles. The technique is reported for lymphedema diagnosis, with high sensitivity and specificity, staging, intraoperative mapping and patency control in lymphaticovenular anastomosis. The substantial advantages/disadvantages of ICG imaging procedures are finally described.

Breast cancer-related lymphedema: risk factors, precautionary measures, and treatments

Breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) is a negative sequela of breast cancer treatment, and well-established risk factors include axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) and regional lymph node radiation (RLNR). BCRL affects approximately 1 in 5 patients treated for breast cancer, and it has a significant negative impact on patients' quality of life after breast cancer treatment, serving as a reminder of previous illness. This paper is a comprehensive review of the current evidence regarding BCRL risk factors, precautionary guidelines, prospective screening, early intervention, and surgical and non-surgical treatment techniques. Through establishing evidence-based BCRL risk factors, researchers and clinicians are better able to prevent, anticipate, and provide early intervention for BCRL. Clinicians can identify patients at high risk and utilize prospective screening programs, which incorporate objective measurements, patient reported outcome measures (PROM), and clinical examination, thereby creating opportunities for early intervention and, accordingly, improving BCRL prognosis. Innovative surgical techniques that minimize and/or prophylactically correct lymphatic disruption, such as axillary reverse mapping (ARM) and lymphatic-venous anastomoses (LVAs), are promising avenues for reducing BCRL incidence. Nonetheless, for those patients with BCRL who remain unresponsive to conservative methods like complete decongestive therapy (CDT), surgical treatment options aiming to reduce limb volume or restore lymphatic flow may prove to be palliative or corrective. It is only through a strong team-based approach that such a continuum of care can exist, and a multidisciplinary approach to BCRL screening, intervention, and research is therefore strongly encouraged.

Lymph drainage of the upper limb and mammary region to the axilla: anatomical study in stillborns

PURPOSE

We studied the lymphatic drainage of the upper limb and mammary region directing to the axilla to investigate whether independent pathways can be observed or whether anastomoses and shared drainage occur between them. This analysis aimed to assess the safety of axillary reverse mapping (ARM) in breast cancer treatment and to understand the development of lymphedema after sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) alone.

METHODS

Seven unfixed stillborn fetuses were injected with a modified Gerota mass in the peri-areolar area, palm and dorsum of the hands, formalin fixed, and then submerged in 10% hydrogen peroxide solution. Microsurgical dissection was then performed on the subcutaneous cellular tissue of the upper limb, axillary region, and anterior thorax to expose the lymphatic vessels and lymph nodes.

RESULTS

The dye injected into the upper limb reached either the lateral axillary group, known to be exclusively responsible for upper limb drainage, or the anterior group, which is typically related to breast drainage. There was great proximity among the pathways and lymph nodes. Communicating lymphatic vessels among these groups of lymph nodes were also found in all studied cases.

DISCUSSION

Lymphedema remains a challenging morbidity in breast cancer treatment. ARM and SLNB aim to avoid unnecessary damage to the lymphatic drainage of the upper limb. However, our anatomical study suggests that ARM may have potential oncological risks because preserved lymph nodes may harbor malignant cells due their proximity, overlapping drainage pathways, and connecting lymph vessels among lymph nodes.

The Feasibility and Oncological Safety of Axillary Reverse Mapping in Patients with Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Prospective Studies

OBJECTIVE

The axillary reverse mapping (ARM) technique has recently been developed to prevent lymphedema by preserving the arm lymphatic drainage during sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) or axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) procedures. The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the feasibility and oncological safety of ARM.

METHODS

We searched Medline, Embase, Web of science, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library for relevant prospective studies. The identification rate of ARM nodes, the crossover rate of SLN-ARM nodes, the proportion of metastatic ARM nodes, and the incidence of complications were pooled into meta-analyses by the random-effects model.

RESULTS

A total of 24 prospective studies were included into meta-analyses, of which 11 studies reported ARM during SLNB, and 18 studies reported ARM during SLNB. The overall identification rate of ARM nodes was 38.2% (95% CI 32.9%-43.8%) during SLNB and 82.8% (78.0%-86.6%) during ALND, respectively. The crossover rate of SLN-ARM nodes was 19.6% (95% CI 14.4%-26.1%). The metastatic rate of ARM nodes was 16.9% (95% CI 14.2%-20.1%). The pooled incidence of lymphedema was 4.1% (95% CI 2.9-5.9%) for patients undergoing ARM procedure.

CONCLUSIONS

The ARM procedure was feasible during ALND. Nevertheless, it was restricted by low identification rate of ARM nodes during SLNB. ARM was beneficial for preventing lymphedema. However, this technique should be performed with caution given the possibility of crossover SLN-ARM nodes and metastatic ARM nodes. ARM appeared to be unsuitable for patients with clinically positive breast cancer due to oncological safety concern.

Lymphedema Precautions: Time to Abandon Old Practices?

The Oncology Grand Rounds series is designed to place original reports published in the Journal into clinical context. A case presentation is followed by a description of diagnostic and management challenges, a review of the relevant literature, and a summary of the authors' suggested management approaches. The goal of this series is to help readers better understand how to apply the results of key studies, including those published in Journal of Clinical Oncology, to patients seen in their own clinical practice.A 46-year-old premenopausal woman with a body mass index of 21 was found on screening mammography to have a new, approximately 1-cm spiculated mass with associated calcifications in the upper outer quadrant of the left breast. Stereotactic core biopsy showed a focus of invasive duct carcinoma, strongly positive for estrogen and progesterone receptors and negative for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2, with associated ductal carcinoma in situ. Clinical examination revealed no palpable mass or axillary lymphadenopathy. She underwent a left lumpectomy with seed localization and sentinel lymph node biopsy. Final pathology revealed an 8-mm well-differentiated invasive carcinoma without lymphovascular invasion and intermediate grade ductal carcinoma in situ. The margins were clear, and three sentinel lymph nodes were negative for metastasis. The 21-gene recurrence score was 10, suggesting a 7% risk of 10-year distant recurrence with adjuvant endocrine treatment. After the completion of adjuvant radiotherapy (42.50 Gy in 16 fractions to the breast), the patient has returned for a follow-up visit. She is a professional violinist and would like to know what she can do to prevent lymphedema on her upcoming flight to Vienna.

Current Trends and Emerging Future of Indocyanine Green Usage in Surgery and Oncology: An Update

BACKGROUND

Indocyanine green (ICG) is a widely available dye of clinical importance that has been used for more than 50 years. Near-infrared (NIR) ICG fluorescence imaging has found a niche in cancer care since 2005, and was reviewed in 2011. There is a need for a comprehensive update and we aim to provide this through a review of the most recent literature.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature using PubMed, EMBASE, and MEDLINE databases of articles published from 2000 to June 2015 evaluated topics pertinent to NIR fluorescence imaging with ICG in the diagnosis and surgical treatment of cancer. Articles previously referenced in a 2011 review and a 2015 meta-analysis were excluded, while articles that referenced future directions and economics were included in this current review.

RESULTS

Since 2011, the literature has grown exponentially, with significant advances at the molecular level. Significant findings from 89 select articles and 10 reviews, most of which were published between 2011 and 2015, are summarized. Preclinical studies are currently underway investigating tumor-specific fluorescence and targeted therapeutic delivery. The potential for ICG exists at every level of cancer care, from diagnosis to surveillance.

CONCLUSION

The indications, applications, and potential for ICG have grown exponentially in the past decade; an updated review of the literature is overdue and we present the most comprehensive review to date.