Table 3.

Results of meta-analysis investigating risk of anastomotic leak by perfusion assessment modality and overall

Modality	AL estimates taken from random-effects model*	Heterogeneity				Weight (%)
		I 2 (%)	τ2	χ2	P
All modalities	0.06 (0.05, 0.07)	69	0.4280	${\mathbf{\chi }}_{65}^2$ = 211.70	<0.01	100
ICG-FA	0.05 (0.04, 0.06)	67	0.4280	${\mathbf{\chi }}_{51}^2$ = 156.37	<0.01	78.2
DRS	0.14 (0.08, 0.24)	57	0.4280	${\mathbf{\chi }}_5^2$ = 11.55	0.04	11.5
HSI	0.08 (0.04, 0.16)	0	0.4280	${\mathbf{\chi }}_4^2$ = 3.8	0.43	7.7
LSCI	0.06 (0.02, 0.19)	0	0.4280	${\mathbf{\chi }}_2^2$ = 1.09	0.58	2.6
Control	0.10 (0.08, 0.12)	80	0.3464	${\mathbf{\chi }}_{32}^2$ = 162.52	<0.01	100

Values in parentheses are 95% confidence intervals. Amount of total heterogeneity accounted for by modalities (R²) = 19.8%. AL, anastomotic leak; ICG-FA, indocyanine green fluorescence angiography; DRS, diffuse reflectance spectroscopy; HSI, hyperspectral imaging; LSCI, laser speckle contrast imaging.