An Inconvenient Truth of Clinical Assessment and Indocyanine Green Angiography Precise Marking for Indeterminate Burn Excision

BACKGROUND: The clinical assessment of indeterminate burn wounds has relatively poor accuracy. Indocyanine green angiography (ICGA) has high accuracy and can be used to mark wounds precisely so as to guide burn excision. This study aimed to assess the differences between ICGA and clinical assessment marking and compare the marking result with the long-term wound outcome. METHODS: This was a prospective, multicentered, triple-blinded, experimental study. Indeterminate burn wounds were clinically assessed, and the area to be excised was firstly marked by the attending surgeon. ICGA marking was then performed by a second surgeon. Measurement of the marked area was conducted by a third surgeon. Three surgeons were each blinded to the others' processes. The wounds were followed up to assess complete wound closures on day 21. RESULTS: There were 20 burn sites included in the study. There was a significant difference in the marked areas between clinical assessment and ICGA (mean, 57.3 ± 44.1%; P = 0.001). The maximum difference found was as high as 160.9%. The correction rate of ICGA marking to complete wound closure on day 21 was 95.0%. Over 90% of the decreased areas of excision—which were assessed by ICGA to be superficial burns but evaluated by clinical assessment to be deep burns—were completely healed on day 21. CONCLUSIONS: ICGA contributes to a significant difference versus clinical assessment in the marking for excision of indeterminate burns and strongly associates with long-term wound outcomes. The burn wounds can be assessed precisely to reduce unnecessary excision and prevent inadequate excision.