Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35984660›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2022

Development and Validation of a Model for Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgical Instrument Recognition Using Convolutional Neural Network-Based Instance Segmentation and Videos of Laparoscopic Procedures.

Daichi Kitaguchi, Younae Lee, Kazuyuki Hayashi, Kei Nakajima, Shigehiro Kojima, Hiro Hasegawa, Nobuyoshi Takeshita, Kensaku Mori, Masaaki Ito

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 34 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
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

9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Daichi KitaguchiSurgical Device Innovation Office, National Cancer Center Hospital East, Kashiwanoha, Kashiwa, Chiba, Japan.
Younae LeeSurgical Device Innovation Office, National Cancer Center Hospital East, Kashiwanoha, Kashiwa, Chiba, Japan.
Kazuyuki HayashiSurgical Device Innovation Office, National Cancer Center Hospital East, Kashiwanoha, Kashiwa, Chiba, Japan.
Kei NakajimaSurgical Device Innovation Office, National Cancer Center Hospital East, Kashiwanoha, Kashiwa, Chiba, Japan.
Shigehiro KojimaSurgical Device Innovation Office, National Cancer Center Hospital East, Kashiwanoha, Kashiwa, Chiba, Japan.
Hiro HasegawaSurgical Device Innovation Office, National Cancer Center Hospital East, Kashiwanoha, Kashiwa, Chiba, Japan.
Nobuyoshi TakeshitaSurgical Device Innovation Office, National Cancer Center Hospital East, Kashiwanoha, Kashiwa, Chiba, Japan.
Kensaku MoriGraduate School of Informatics, Nagoya University, Nagoya, Aichi, Japan.
Masaaki ItoSurgical Device Innovation Office, National Cancer Center Hospital East, Kashiwanoha, Kashiwa, Chiba, Japan.
National Cancer Center Hospital East · JPNagoya University · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Deep learning-based automatic surgical instrument recognition is an indispensable technology for surgical research and development. However, pixel-level recognition with high accuracy is required to make it suitable for surgical automation. Objective: To develop a deep learning model that can simultaneously recognize 8 types of surgical instruments frequently used in laparoscopic colorectal operations and evaluate its recognition performance. Design, Setting, and Participants: This quality improvement study was conducted at a single institution with a multi-institutional data set. Laparoscopic colorectal surgical videos recorded between April 1, 2009, and December 31, 2021, were included in the video data set. Deep learning-based instance segmentation, an image recognition approach that recognizes each object individually and pixel by pixel instead of roughly enclosing with a bounding box, was performed for 8 types of surgical instruments. Main Outcomes and Measures: Average precision, calculated from the area under the precision-recall curve, was used as an evaluation metric. The average precision represents the number of instances of true-positive, false-positive, and false-negative results, and the mean average precision value for 8 types of surgical instruments was calculated. Five-fold cross-validation was used as the validation method. The annotation data set was split into 5 segments, of which 4 were used for training and the remainder for validation. The data set was split at the per-case level instead of the per-frame level; thus, the images extracted from an intraoperative video in the training set never appeared in the validation set. Validation was performed for all 5 validation sets, and the average mean average precision was calculated. Results: In total, 337 laparoscopic colorectal surgical videos were used. Pixel-by-pixel annotation was manually performed for 81 760 labels on 38 628 static images, constituting the annotation data set. The mean average precisions of the instance segmentation for surgical instruments were 90.9% for 3 instruments, 90.3% for 4 instruments, 91.6% for 6 instruments, and 91.8% for 8 instruments. Conclusions and Relevance: A deep learning-based instance segmentation model that simultaneously recognizes 8 types of surgical instruments with high accuracy was successfully developed. The accuracy was maintained even when the number of types of surgical instruments increased. This model can be applied to surgical innovations, such as intraoperative navigation and surgical automation.

Indexed as

Colorectal NeoplasmsLaparoscopyAutomationHumansNeural Networks, ComputerSurgical Instruments

Identifiers

PMID35984660
PMCPMC9391983
OpenAlexW4292378966

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.