Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35574559›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in surgery2022

Machine Learning-Based Surgical Planning for Neurosurgery: Artificial Intelligent Approaches to the Cranium.

Tolga Turan Dundar, Ismail Yurtsever, Meltem Kurt Pehlivanoglu, Ugur Yildiz, Aysegul Eker, Mehmet Ali Demir, Ahmet Serdar Mutluer, Recep Tektaş, Mevlude Sila Kazan, Serkan Kitis and 3 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
3.6field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

30 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 61 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Obstacles and Trials in Treating Primary Brain Tumors.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Tolga Turan DundarBezmiâlem Vakif Üniversitesi, Istanbul, Turkey.
Ismail YurtseverBezmiâlem Vakif Üniversitesi, Istanbul, Turkey.
Meltem Kurt PehlivanogluKocaeli University, Izmit, Turkey.
Ugur YildizKocaeli University, Izmit, Turkey.
Aysegul EkerKocaeli University, Izmit, Turkey.
Mehmet Ali DemirKocaeli University, Izmit, Turkey.
Ahmet Serdar MutluerBezmiâlem Vakif Üniversitesi, Istanbul, Turkey.
Recep TektaşKocaeli University, Izmit, Turkey.
Mevlude Sila KazanKocaeli University, Izmit, Turkey.
Serkan KitisBezmiâlem Vakif Üniversitesi, Istanbul, Turkey.
Abdulkerim GokogluPrivate System Hospital, Kayseri, Turkey.
Ihsan DoganAnkara University, Ankara, Turkey.
Nevcihan DuruKocaeli Health and Technology University, Başiskele, Turkey.
Kocaeli Üniversitesi · TRBezmiâlem Vakıf Üniversitesi · TRAnkara University · TRKayseri Eğitim ve Araştırma Hastanesi · TRKocaeli Sağlık ve Teknoloji Üniversitesi

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objectives: Artificial intelligence (AI) applications in neurosurgery have an increasing momentum as well as the growing number of implementations in the medical literature. In recent years, AI research define a link between neuroscience and AI. It is a connection between knowing and understanding the brain and how to simulate the brain. The machine learning algorithms, as a subset of AI, are able to learn with experiences, perform big data analysis, and fulfill human-like tasks. Intracranial surgical approaches that have been defined, disciplined, and developed in the last century have become more effective with technological developments. We aimed to define individual-safe, intracranial approaches by introducing functional anatomical structures and pathological areas to artificial intelligence. Methods: Preoperative MR images of patients with deeply located brain tumors were used for planning. Intracranial arteries, veins, and neural tracts are listed and numbered. Voxel values of these selected regions in cranial MR sequences were extracted and labeled. Tumor tissue was segmented as the target. Q-learning algorithm which is a model-free reinforcement learning algorithm was run on labeled voxel values (on optimal paths extracted from the new heuristic-based path planning algorithm), then the algorithm was assigned to list the cortico-tumoral pathways that aim to remove the maximum tumor tissue and in the meantime that functional anatomical tissues will be least affected. Results: The most suitable cranial entry areas were found with the artificial intelligence algorithm. Cortico-tumoral pathways were revealed using Q-learning from these optimal points. Conclusions: AI will make a significant contribution to the positive outcomes as its use in both preoperative surgical planning and intraoperative technique equipment assisted neurosurgery, its use increased.

Indexed as

approachesartificial intelligence (AI)brain tumorcranial approachesmachine learningneurosurgeryneurosurgical planning

Identifiers

PMID35574559
PMCPMC9099011
OpenAlexW4225138773

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.