ArticleInternational journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery2021
Patient-specific prediction of SEEG electrode bending for stereotactic neurosurgical planning.
Article in International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Stereoelectroencephalography for drug resistant epilepsy: precision and complications in stepwise improvement of frameless implantation.Acta neurochirurgica · 2025Article
- Influence Analysis of Education Policy on Migrant Children's Education Integration Using Artificial Intelligence and Deep Learning.Frontiers in psychology · 2022Article
- Informative and Reliable Tract Segmentation for Preoperative Planning.Frontiers in radiology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeElectrode bending observed after stereotactic interventions is typically not accounted for in either computer-assisted planning algorithms, where straight trajectories are assumed, or in quality assessment, where only metrics related to entry and target points are reported. Our aim is to provide a fully automated and validated pipeline for the prediction of stereo-electroencephalography (SEEG) electrode bending.
methodsWe transform electrodes of 86 cases into a common space and compare features-based and image-based neural networks on their ability to regress local displacement ([Formula: see text]) or electrode bending ([Formula: see text]). Electrodes were stratified into six groups based on brain structures at the entry and target point. Models, both with and without Monte Carlo (MC) dropout, were trained and validated using tenfold cross-validation.
resultsmage-based models outperformed features-based models for all groups, and models that predicted [Formula: see text] performed better than for [Formula: see text]. Image-based model prediction with MC dropout resulted in lower mean squared error (MSE) with improvements up to 12.9% ([Formula: see text]) and 39.9% ([Formula: see text]), compared to no dropout. Using an image of brain tissue types (cortex, white and deep grey matter) resulted in similar, and sometimes better performance, compared to using a T1-weighted MRI when predicting [Formula: see text]. When inferring trajectories of image-based models (brain tissue types), 86.9% of trajectories had an MSE[Formula: see text] mm.
conclusionAn image-based approach regressing local displacement with an image of brain tissue types resulted in more accurate electrode bending predictions compared to other approaches, inputs, and outputs. Future work will investigate the integration of electrode bending into planning and quality assessment algorithms.
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.