ArticleBJS open2024
Artificial intelligence model for perigastric blood vessel recognition during laparoscopic radical gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy in locally advanced gastric cancer.
Article in BJS open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Letter to Editor of Annals of Surgical Oncology Concerning "Lymphadenectomy in Siewert II Gastroesophageal Junction (GEJ) Cancer".Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence Applications in Gastric Cancer Surgery: Bridging Early Diagnosis and Responsible Precision Medicine.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Therapeutic Value of Dissecting Distal Lymph Nodes in Proximal Gastric Cancer: A TVI-Based Risk Stratification.Journal of gastrointestinal cancer · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence in gastric cancer research: a bibliometric and visualized analysis from 1993 to 2026.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Review
- Artificial Intelligence in Gastrointestinal Surgery: A Systematic Review of Its Role in Laparoscopic and Robotic Surgery.Journal of personalized medicine · 2025Review
- Challenges in clinical translation of artificial intelligence and real-time imaging navigation in radical gastrectomy.World journal of gastroenterology · 2025Review
- Translational artificial intelligence in gastrointestinal and hepatic disorders: Advancing intelligent clinical decision-making for diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis.World journal of gastroenterology · 2025Review
- Effects of enhanced recovery after surgery on postoperative intestinal function and intestinal flora during laparoscopic gastric cancer surgery.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2025Article
- Artificial intelligence-driven approaches in pituitary neuroendocrine tumors: integrating endocrine-metabolic profiling for enhanced diagnostics and therapeutics.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundRadical gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy is standard surgical protocol for locally advanced gastric cancer. The surgical experience and skill in recognizing blood vessels and performing lymph node dissection differ between surgeons, which may influence intraoperative safety and postoperative oncological outcomes. Hence, the aim of this study was to develop an accurate and real-time deep learning-based perigastric blood vessel recognition model to assist intraoperative performance.
methodsThis was a retrospective study assessing videos of laparoscopic radical gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy. The model was developed based on DeepLabv3+. Static performance was evaluated using precision, recall, intersection over union, and F1 score. Dynamic performance was verified using 15 intraoperative videos.
resultsThe study involved 2460 images captured from 116 videos. Mean(s.d.) precision, recall, intersection over union, and F1 score for the artery were 0.9442(0.0059), 0.9099(0.0163), 0.8635(0.0146), and 0.9267(0.0084) respectively. Mean(s.d.) precision, recall, intersection over union, and F1 score for the vein were 0.9349(0.0064), 0.8491(0.0259), 0.8015(0.0206), and 0.8897(0.0127) respectively. The model also performed well in recognizing perigastric blood vessels in 15 dynamic test videos. Intersection over union and F1 score in difficult image conditions, such as bleeding or massive surgical smoke in the field of view, were reduced, while images from obese patients resulted in satisfactory vessel recognition.
conclusionThe model recognized the perigastric blood vessels with satisfactory predictive value in the test set and performed well in the dynamic videos. It therefore shows promise with regard to increasing safety and decreasing accidental bleeding during laparoscopic gastrectomy.
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.