ArticleSurgical endoscopy2023
TEsoNet: knowledge transfer in surgical phase recognition from laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy to the laparoscopic part of Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Radiomics and artificial intelligence-based prediction of tumor response in digestive system neoplasm: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Application of artificial intelligence in esophageal surgery: a systematic review.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Pooled it
- AI-Based Automated Instrument Tracking During Endoscopic Skull Base Surgery: A Pilot Feasibility Study.World journal of otorhinolaryngology - head and neck surgery · 2026Article
- Automated Operative Phase and Step Recognition in Vestibular Schwannoma Surgery: Development and Preclinical Evaluation of a Deep Learning Neural Network (IDEAL Stage 0).Neurosurgery · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence and robotic surgery in emergency gastrointestinal procedures: a review of current evidence and future directions.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Review
- Bibliometric analysis of deep learning for surgical instrument segmentation, detection and tracking in minimally invasive surgery.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Review
- Artificial intelligence in gastrointestinal surgery: A systematic review.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2025Article
- Use of artificial intelligence in the analysis of digital videos of invasive surgical procedures: scoping review.BJS open · 2025Article
- Artificial intelligence for intraoperative video analysis in robotic-assisted esophagectomy.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Review
- Remote robotic surgery: implementing a technology 20 years in the making.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Review
- Towards multimodal graph neural networks for surgical instrument anticipation.International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery · 2024Article
- Automated surgical step recognition in transurethral bladder tumor resection using artificial intelligence: transfer learning across surgical modalities.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2024Article
- Artificial Intelligence in Surgery and Its Potential for Gastric Cancer.Journal of gastric cancer · 2023Review
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 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSurgical phase recognition using computer vision presents an essential requirement for artificial intelligence-assisted analysis of surgical workflow. Its performance is heavily dependent on large amounts of annotated video data, which remain a limited resource, especially concerning highly specialized procedures. Knowledge transfer from common to more complex procedures can promote data efficiency. Phase recognition models trained on large, readily available datasets may be extrapolated and transferred to smaller datasets of different procedures to improve generalizability. The conditions under which transfer learning is appropriate and feasible remain to be established.
methodsWe defined ten operative phases for the laparoscopic part of Ivor-Lewis Esophagectomy through expert consensus. A dataset of 40 videos was annotated accordingly. The knowledge transfer capability of an established model architecture for phase recognition (CNN + LSTM) was adapted to generate a "Transferal Esophagectomy Network" (TEsoNet) for co-training and transfer learning from laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy to the laparoscopic part of Ivor-Lewis Esophagectomy, exploring different training set compositions and training weights.
resultsThe explored model architecture is capable of accurate phase detection in complex procedures, such as Esophagectomy, even with low quantities of training data. Knowledge transfer between two upper gastrointestinal procedures is feasible and achieves reasonable accuracy with respect to operative phases with high procedural overlap.
conclusionRobust phase recognition models can achieve reasonable yet phase-specific accuracy through transfer learning and co-training between two related procedures, even when exposed to small amounts of training data of the target procedure. Further exploration is required to determine appropriate data amounts, key characteristics of the training procedure and temporal annotation methods required for successful transferal phase recognition. Transfer learning across different procedures addressing small datasets may increase data efficiency. Finally, to enable the surgical application of AI for intraoperative risk mitigation, coverage of rare, specialized procedures needs to be explored.
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.