ArticleThe international journal of medical robotics + computer assisted surgery : MRCAS2025
Automated Digital Image Optimisation in Intraoperative 2D and 3D Imaging Using a Mobile C-Arm With Flat-Panel Detector.
Article in The international journal of medical robotics + computer assisted surgery : MRCAS, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
- Transforming spinal surgery: five years of navigation, workflow optimization and clinical impact.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Article
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
backgroundAssistance tools for intraoperative 2D and 3D imaging to decrease acquisition effort and to improve assessment of 3D image data were evaluated.
methodsTwo automated optimisation procedures were evaluated in a cadaver (Cios Spin, Siemens, Germany): The ScrewScout function for assisted pedicle screw assessment. Then, an algorithm for metal artefact reduction (MAR). Additionally, a tool for simplified setting of image contrast and brightness was evaluated regarding the result and elapsed time.
resultsThe time required without automated assistance was 83s [70-105]. With the computer assistance, this time was significantly lower at 22s [15-32] (p = 0.003). MAR resulted in an improvement in image impression. This improvement became smaller with increasing clinical experience. The time needed for setting of image acquisition parameters was significantly (p = 0.05) lowered from 140s [24-389] to 61s [14-166] using the assistance tool.
conclusionsAutomated assistance tools for image optimisation can provide practical support in the intraoperative setting.
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.