Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38020988›Full record

ReviewBrain & spine2023

Computer-vision based analysis of the neurosurgical scene - A systematic review.

Félix Buyck, Jef Vandemeulebroucke, Jakub Ceranka, Frederick Van Gestel, Jan Frederick Cornelius, Johnny Duerinck, Michaël Bruneau

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Brain & spine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Machine Intelligence in Cerebrovascular and Endovascular Neurosurgery.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2024
    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

7 authors.

Félix BuyckDepartment of Neurosurgery, Universitair Ziekenhuis Brussel (UZ Brussel), 1090, Brussels, Belgium.
Jef VandemeulebrouckeVrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB), Department of Electronics and Informatics (ETRO), 1050, Brussels, Belgium.
Jakub CerankaVrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB), Department of Electronics and Informatics (ETRO), 1050, Brussels, Belgium.
Frederick Van GestelDepartment of Neurosurgery, Universitair Ziekenhuis Brussel (UZ Brussel), 1090, Brussels, Belgium.
Jan Frederick CorneliusDepartment of Neurosurgery, Medical Faculty, Heinrich-Heine-University, 40225, Düsseldorf, Germany.
Johnny DuerinckDepartment of Neurosurgery, Universitair Ziekenhuis Brussel (UZ Brussel), 1090, Brussels, Belgium.
Michaël BruneauDepartment of Neurosurgery, Universitair Ziekenhuis Brussel (UZ Brussel), 1090, Brussels, Belgium.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: With increasing use of robotic surgical adjuncts, artificial intelligence and augmented reality in neurosurgery, the automated analysis of digital images and videos acquired over various procedures becomes a subject of increased interest. While several computer vision (CV) methods have been developed and implemented for analyzing surgical scenes, few studies have been dedicated to neurosurgery. Research question: In this work, we present a systematic literature review focusing on CV methodologies specifically applied to the analysis of neurosurgical procedures based on intra-operative images and videos. Additionally, we provide recommendations for the future developments of CV models in neurosurgery. Material and methods: We conducted a systematic literature search in multiple databases until January 17, 2023, including Web of Science, PubMed, IEEE Xplore, Embase, and SpringerLink. Results: We identified 17 studies employing CV algorithms on neurosurgical videos/images. The most common applications of CV were tool and neuroanatomical structure detection or characterization, and to a lesser extent, surgical workflow analysis. Convolutional neural networks (CNN) were the most frequently utilized architecture for CV models (65%), demonstrating superior performances in tool detection and segmentation. In particular, mask recurrent-CNN manifested most robust performance outcomes across different modalities. Discussion and conclusion: Our systematic review demonstrates that CV models have been reported that can effectively detect and differentiate tools, surgical phases, neuroanatomical structures, as well as critical events in complex neurosurgical scenes with accuracies above 95%. Automated tool recognition contributes to objective characterization and assessment of surgical performance, with potential applications in neurosurgical training and intra-operative safety management.

Indexed as

Automated detectioncomputer visionNeuroanatomySurgical instrumentsSurgical phase recognitionSurgical videos

Identifiers

PMID38020988
PMCPMC10668095

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.