Table 2. Comparison of ICG and other methods in pulmonary nodule localization.
| ICG vs. other methods | Advantages | Disadvantages |
|---|---|---|
| ICG vs. hook-wire (37-42) | (I) Less discomfort or pain | (I) Requires fluorescence equipment |
| (II) No marker dislodgement or migration | (II) Not suitable for patients with delayed surgery | |
| (III) No risk of air embolism | (III) Limited information on lesion depth | |
| ICG vs. fiducials or microcoils (34,43) | (I) No risk of gas embolism | (I) Requires fluorescence equipment |
| (II) No additional radiation exposure | (II) Not suitable for patients with delayed surgery | |
| (III) Limited information on lesion depth | ||
| ICG vs. PBV or MB (12,16) | (I) Better penetration depth | None |
| (II) Suitable for circumstances of lung damage, anthracosis, and pulmonary hemorrhage | ||
| (III) Better for pathological diagnosis | ||
| ICG vs. barium (44) | (I) No additional radiation exposure | (I) Requires fluorescence equipment |
| (II) Better for pathological diagnosis | (II) Not suitable for patients with delayed surgery | |
| (III) Limited information on lesion depth | ||
| ICG vs. lipiodol (45) | (I) No additional radiation exposure | (I) Requires fluorescence equipment |
| (II) No risk of embolism risk | (II) Not suitable for patients with delayed surgery | |
| (III) Limited information on lesion depth | ||
| ICG vs. technetium-99m (46) | (I) No additional radiation exposure | (I) Requires fluorescence equipment |
| (II) No need for gamma probe | (II) Limited information on lesion depth |
ICG, indocyanine green; PBV, patent blue V; MB, methylene blue.