ArticleSurgical endoscopy2020
Augmented reality in gynecologic laparoscopic surgery: development, evaluation of accuracy and clinical relevance of a device useful to identify ureters during surgery.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Augmented Reality, Mixed Reality, Computer Vision, and Three-Dimensional Modeling in Fertility-Preserving Minimally Invasive Gynecologic Surgery: A Scoping Review with Narrative Synthesis.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Article
- Exploring Urinary Tract Injuries in Gynecological Surgery: Current Insights and Future Directions.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Phantom study on surgical performance in augmented reality laparoscopy.International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery · 2023Article
- Article
- Surgical data science - from concepts toward clinical translation.Medical image analysis · 2022Review
- Concept for Markerless 6D Tracking Employing Volumetric Optical Coherence Tomography.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo develop and evaluate a non-invasive surgical assistance based on augmented reality (AR) in the detection of ureters on animal model.
methodAfter an experimental prototyping step on two pigs to determine the optimal conditions for visualization of the ureter in AR, three pigs were operated three times at 1 week intervals. The intervention consisted of an identification of the ureter, with and without the assistance of AR. At the end of the intervention, a clip was placed on the AR-proposed ureter to evaluate its accuracy. By doing a cone beam computed tomography, we measured the distance between the contrasted ureter and the clips in the acquired volume. Thirteen videos were recorded, allowing subsequent evaluation of the clinical relevance of the device.
resultsThe feasibility of the technique has been confirmed. The margin of error was 1.77 mm (± 1.56 mm) for ureter localization accuracy. In order to evaluate the perceived relevance and accuracy in the detection of AR-assisted ureter, 58 gynecological surgeons were shown the videos then questioned. Of the 754 responses obtained (13 videos × 58 surgeons), the ureter was identified in direct vision in 31.2% of cases versus 81.7% in AR (p value 3.62 × 10
conclusionThis first AR device showed a satisfactory precision in the detection of ureters with a favorable opinion of surgeons. This surgical assistance system could be helpful in the performance of difficult procedures, for example in the case of patients, which have undergone multiple surgeries in the past.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.