ReviewInternational urology and nephrology2024
Current advances in the use of artificial intelligence in predicting and managing urological complications.
Review in International urology and nephrology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Artificial intelligence advances in cystoscopy and imaging for bladder cancer: a narrative review.The Canadian journal of urology · 2026Review
- The emerging landscape of artificial intelligence in robot-assisted surgery: a bibliometric and visualization analysis.Updates in surgery · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence-based prediction of postoperative sepsis in patients undergoing suction mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy in real world practice: a multicenter analysis from the global Suction Lechnology Utility in Mini-PCNL Study (STUMPS) registry.World journal of urology · 2026Article
- The Evolving Role of Artificial Intelligence in Andrological Surgery: Current Landscape and Future Direction.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundArtificial intelligence (AI) has emerged as a promising avenue for improving patient care and surgical outcomes in urological surgery. However, the extent of AI's impact in predicting and managing complications is not fully elucidated.
objectivesWe review the application of AI to foresee and manage complications in urological surgery, assess its efficacy, and discuss challenges to its use. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A targeted non-systematic literature search was conducted using the PubMed and Google Scholar databases to identify studies on AI in urological surgery and its complications. Evidence from the studies was synthesised.
resultsIncorporating AI into various facets of urological surgery has shown promising advancements. From preoperative planning to intraoperative guidance, AI is revolutionising the field, demonstrating remarkable proficiency in tasks such as image analysis, decision-making support, and complication prediction. Studies show that AI programmes are highly accurate, increase surgical precision and efficiency, and reduce complications. However, implementation challenges exist in AI errors, human errors, and ethical issues.
conclusionAI has great potential in predicting and managing surgical complications of urological surgery. Advancements have been made, but challenges and ethical considerations must be addressed before widespread AI implementation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38982018What 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.