SynthesisSurgical endoscopy2022
Computer-aided anatomy recognition in intrathoracic and -abdominal surgery: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Surgical endoscopy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Augmented Reality Implementation in Minimally Invasive Surgery for Future Application in Pulmonary Surgery: A Systematic Review.Surgical innovation · 2024Pooled it
- Analysis and mitigation of equipment-induced shortcuts in AI models for laparoscopic cholecystectomy.PLOS digital health · 2026Article
- Accuracy of ChatGPT-4o in Identifying Anatomical Structures on Cadaveric Images: A Practical Anatomy Examination Study.Clinical anatomy (New York, N.Y.) · 2026Article
- AI-Assisted Recognition of Actual Ureteral and Pancreatic Injuries in Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgery: A Randomized Video Review Study.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence-assisted prediction of bile duct bifurcation site in pure laparoscopic donor right hepatectomy: a retrospective feasibility study.Annals of surgical treatment and research · 2026Article
- Are we developing the right intraoperative AI assistance? Surgeons' perspectives and desired functions.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Do segmentation metrics reflect clinical reality? A surgeon-centered evaluation in robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- External Validation of an Automated Surgical Step Recognition Model for Robotic Distal Gastrectomy (RDG) Using a Multicenter Dataset.Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2025Article
- AI-assisted intraoperative navigation for safe right liver mobilization in pure laparoscopic donor hepatectomy: an experimental multi-institutional validation study.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Comparison of an AI-driven planning tool and manual radiographic measurements in total knee arthroplasty.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2025Article
- Artificial Intelligence in Surgery: A Systematic Review of Use and Validation.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Artificial intelligence assisted operative anatomy recognition in endoscopic pituitary surgery.NPJ digital medicine · 2024Article
- Real-time segmentation of biliary structure in pure laparoscopic donor hepatectomy.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Development, deployment and scaling of operating room-ready artificial intelligence for real-time surgical decision support.NPJ digital medicine · 2024Article
- The Role and Efficiency of an AI-Powered Software in the Evaluation of Lower Limb Radiographs before and after Total Knee Arthroplasty.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Deep learning-based recognition of key anatomical structures during robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMinimally invasive surgery is complex and associated with substantial learning curves. Computer-aided anatomy recognition, such as artificial intelligence-based algorithms, may improve anatomical orientation, prevent tissue injury, and improve learning curves. The study objective was to provide a comprehensive overview of current literature on the accuracy of anatomy recognition algorithms in intrathoracic and -abdominal surgery.
methodsThis systematic review is reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guideline. Pubmed, Embase, and IEEE Xplore were searched for original studies up until January 2022 on computer-aided anatomy recognition, without requiring intraoperative imaging or calibration equipment. Extracted features included surgical procedure, study population and design, algorithm type, pre-training methods, pre- and post-processing methods, data augmentation, anatomy annotation, training data, testing data, model validation strategy, goal of the algorithm, target anatomical structure, accuracy, and inference time.
resultsAfter full-text screening, 23 out of 7124 articles were included. Included studies showed a wide diversity, with six possible recognition tasks in 15 different surgical procedures, and 14 different accuracy measures used. Risk of bias in the included studies was high, especially regarding patient selection and annotation of the reference standard. Dice and intersection over union (IoU) scores of the algorithms ranged from 0.50 to 0.98 and from 74 to 98%, respectively, for various anatomy recognition tasks. High-accuracy algorithms were typically trained using larger datasets annotated by expert surgeons and focused on less-complex anatomy. Some of the high-accuracy algorithms were developed using pre-training and data augmentation.
conclusionsThe accuracy of included anatomy recognition algorithms varied substantially, ranging from moderate to good. Solid comparison between algorithms was complicated by the wide variety of applied methodology, target anatomical structures, and reported accuracy measures. Computer-aided intraoperative anatomy recognition is an upcoming research discipline, but still at its infancy. Larger datasets and methodological guidelines are required to improve accuracy and clinical applicability in future research.
trial registrationPROSPERO registration number: CRD42021264226.
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.