ArticleClinics in orthopedic surgery2024
Assessment of Automated Identification of Phases in Videos of Total Hip Arthroplasty Using Deep Learning Techniques.
Article in Clinics in orthopedic surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Artificial intelligence in the operating room: A systematic review of AI models for surgical phase, instruments and anatomical structure identification.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2025Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: As the population ages, the rates of hip diseases and fragility fractures are increasing, making total hip arthroplasty (THA) one of the best methods for treating elderly patients. With the increasing number of THA surgeries and diverse surgical methods, there is a need for standard evaluation protocols. This study aimed to use deep learning algorithms to classify THA videos and evaluate the accuracy of the labelling of these videos. Methods: In our study, we manually annotated 7 phases in THA, including skin incision, broaching, exposure of acetabulum, acetabular reaming, acetabular cup positioning, femoral stem insertion, and skin closure. Within each phase, a second trained annotator marked the beginning and end of instrument usages, such as the skin blade, forceps, Bovie, suction device, suture material, retractor, rasp, femoral stem, acetabular reamer, head trial, and real head. Results: In our study, we utilized YOLOv3 to collect 540 operating images of THA procedures and create a scene annotation model. The results of our study showed relatively high accuracy in the clear classification of surgical techniques such as skin incision and closure, broaching, acetabular reaming, and femoral stem insertion, with a mean average precision (mAP) of 0.75 or higher. Most of the equipment showed good accuracy of mAP 0.7 or higher, except for the suction device, suture material, and retractor. Conclusions: Scene annotation for the instrument and phases in THA using deep learning techniques may provide potentially useful tools for subsequent documentation, assessment of skills, and feedback.
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.