Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36836223›Full record

ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2023

Automated Capture of Intraoperative Adverse Events Using Artificial Intelligence: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Michael B Eppler, Aref S Sayegh, Marissa Maas, Abhishek Venkat, Sij Hemal, Mihir M Desai, Andrew J Hung, Teodor Grantcharov, Giovanni E Cacciamani, Mitchell G Goldenberg

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
6.4field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Clear Vision, Clear Savings: Enhancing Efficiency in Minimally Invasive Surgery.JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons
    Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Surgical bleeding prediction using transformer: an application to laparoscopic cholecystectomy.International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery · 2026
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Artificial Intelligence Modeling and Priapism.Current urology reports · 2024
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. 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

10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Michael B EpplerCatherine and Joseph Aresty Department of Urology, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90033, USA.
Aref S SayeghCatherine and Joseph Aresty Department of Urology, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90033, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-9320-2987
Marissa MaasCatherine and Joseph Aresty Department of Urology, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90033, USA.
Abhishek VenkatCatherine and Joseph Aresty Department of Urology, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90033, USA.
Sij HemalCatherine and Joseph Aresty Department of Urology, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90033, USA.
Mihir M DesaiCatherine and Joseph Aresty Department of Urology, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90033, USA.
Andrew J HungCatherine and Joseph Aresty Department of Urology, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90033, USA.
Teodor GrantcharovDepartment of Surgery, Clinical Excellence Research Centre, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-3424-5618
Giovanni E CacciamaniCatherine and Joseph Aresty Department of Urology, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90033, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-8892-5539
Mitchell G GoldenbergCatherine and Joseph Aresty Department of Urology, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90033, USA.
University of Southern California · USStanford University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Intraoperative adverse events (iAEs) impact the outcomes of surgery, and yet are not routinely collected, graded, and reported. Advancements in artificial intelligence (AI) have the potential to power real-time, automatic detection of these events and disrupt the landscape of surgical safety through the prediction and mitigation of iAEs. We sought to understand the current implementation of AI in this space. A literature review was performed to PRISMA-DTA standards. Included articles were from all surgical specialties and reported the automatic identification of iAEs in real-time. Details on surgical specialty, adverse events, technology used for detecting iAEs, AI algorithm/validation, and reference standards/conventional parameters were extracted. A meta-analysis of algorithms with available data was conducted using a hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC). The QUADAS-2 tool was used to assess the article risk of bias and clinical applicability. A total of 2982 studies were identified by searching PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and IEEE Xplore, with 13 articles included for data extraction. The AI algorithms detected bleeding (n = 7), vessel injury (n = 1), perfusion deficiencies (n = 1), thermal damage (n = 1), and EMG abnormalities (n = 1), among other iAEs. Nine of the thirteen articles described at least one validation method for the detection system; five explained using cross-validation and seven divided the dataset into training and validation cohorts. Meta-analysis showed the algorithms were both sensitive and specific across included iAEs (detection OR 14.74, CI 4.7-46.2). There was heterogeneity in reported outcome statistics and article bias risk. There is a need for standardization of iAE definitions, detection, and reporting to enhance surgical care for all patients. The heterogeneous applications of AI in the literature highlights the pluripotent nature of this technology. Applications of these algorithms across a breadth of urologic procedures should be investigated to assess the generalizability of these data.

Indexed as

adverse effectsartificial intelligenceintraoperative adverse eventsintraoperative periodPRISMAsystematic review

Identifiers

PMID36836223
PMCPMC9963108
OpenAlexW4321372400

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.