ArticleLangenbeck's archives of surgery2020
Local, semi-automatic, three-dimensional liver reconstruction or external provider? An analysis of performance and time expense.
Article in Langenbeck's archives of surgery, 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.
- Effect of virtual reality on spatial-anatomical understanding in preoperative liver surgery: a randomized crossover study.Scientific reports · 2026Trial
- Registration accuracy comparing different rendering techniques on local vs external virtual 3D liver model reconstruction for vascular landmark setting by intraoperative ultrasound in augmented reality navigated liver resection.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2024Article
- Clinical efficacy and safety of 3D vascular reconstruction combined with 3D navigation in laparoscopic hepatectomy: systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2022Article
- Article
- Liver Resection for Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma-Single-Center Experience with 286 Patients Undergoing Surgical Exploration over a Thirteen Year Period.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Article
- Virtual reality and 3D printing improve preoperative visualization of 3D liver reconstructions-results from a preclinical comparison of presentation modalities and user's preference.Annals of translational medicine · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeIn hepatobiliary surgery, preoperative three-dimensional reconstruction based on CT or MRI can be provided externally or by local, semi-automatic software. We analyzed the time expense and quality of external versus local three-dimensional reconstructions.
methodsThree first-year residents reconstructed data from 20 patients with liver pathologies using a local, semi-automatic, server-based program. Initially, five randomly selected patient datasets were segmented, with the visualization of an established external company available for comparison at all times (learning phase). The other fifteen cases were compared with the external datasets after completing local reconstruction (control phase). Total time expense/case and for specific manual and semi-automated reconstruction steps were recorded. Segmentation quality was analyzed by testing the equivalence for liver and tumor volumes, portal vein sectors, and hepatic vein territories.
resultsThe median total reconstruction time was reduced from 2.5 h (learning phase) to 1.5 h (control phase) (- 42%; p < 0.001). Comparing the total and detailed liver volumes (sectors and territories) as well as the tumor volumes in the control phase equivalence was proven. In addition, a highly significant correlation between the external and local analysis was obtained over all analyzed segments with a very high ICC (median [IQR]: 0.98 [0.97; 0.99]; p < 0.01).
conclusionLocal, semi-automatic reconstruction performed by inexperienced residents was feasible with an expert level time expense and the quality of the three-dimensional images was comparable with those from an external provider.
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.