Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40739419›Full record

SynthesisSurgical endoscopy2025

Untangling surgical gesture analysis-are we even speaking the same language? a systematic review.

Rikke Groth Olsen, Annarita Ghosh Andersen, Andrew J Hung, Morten Bo Søndergaard Svendsen, Julia Abildgaard Dagnæs-Hansen, Lars Konge, Andreas Røder, Flemming Bjerrum

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Surgical endoscopy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
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

8 authors.

Rikke Groth OlsenCopenhagen Academy for Medical Education and Simulation (CAMES), Center for HR & Education, the Capital Region of Denmark, Ryesgade 53B, 2100, Copenhagen, Denmark. rikke.groth.olsen.01@regionh.dk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9587-4119
Annarita Ghosh AndersenCopenhagen Academy for Medical Education and Simulation (CAMES), Center for HR & Education, the Capital Region of Denmark, Ryesgade 53B, 2100, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Andrew J HungDepartment of Urology, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Morten Bo Søndergaard SvendsenDrug Delivery and Sensing (IDUN), Health Tech, Technical University of Denmark, Lyngby, Denmark.
Julia Abildgaard Dagnæs-HansenDepartment of Urology, Copenhagen Prostate Cancer Center, Copenhagen University Hospital-Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Lars KongeCopenhagen Academy for Medical Education and Simulation (CAMES), Center for HR & Education, the Capital Region of Denmark, Ryesgade 53B, 2100, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Andreas RøderDepartment of Urology, Copenhagen Prostate Cancer Center, Copenhagen University Hospital-Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Flemming BjerrumCopenhagen Academy for Medical Education and Simulation (CAMES), Center for HR & Education, the Capital Region of Denmark, Ryesgade 53B, 2100, Copenhagen, Denmark.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSurgeons' technical performance directly influences postoperative outcomes after surgery. Therefore, it is essential to develop the best methods for surgical quality. One method is surgical gesture analysis which can be used with AI models. Our objective was to conduct a systematic review to assess the current evidence for the use of surgical gesture use in minimally invasive surgery, including how surgical gestures have been defined and applied in the existing literature.

methodsA systematic literature review was performed on September 2nd, 2024, by searching four electronic databases. We identified studies examining minimally invasive surgical procedures assessed with any form of surgical gestures. The modified Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal checklist was used for quality assessment and the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) criteria were used for assessment of risk of bias. The protocol was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) prior to the systematic literature review (CRD42024487587).

resultsA total of 75 studies were included. The objectives of the studies were assigned to three categories: engineering (n = 59), educational (n = 24), and clinical (n = 4) use of surgical gestures. Surgical gestures were used to assess the experience levels of the surgeons and to provide feedback. Only four studies examined whether surgical gestures could predict patient outcomes but found it was better than traditional clinical features. One-fourth of the studies failed to report on the methods of data collection, data source, and study subjects used.

conclusionSurgical gesture analysis has the potential to be used for competency and quality assessment. However, the current literature lacks consensus on the terminology, study reporting methodology, and data granularity needed to develop solid AI models. This can delay the development and use of surgical gestures. Although using surgical gestures to predict patient outcomes is promising, the field is still in its early stages, and multi-disciplinary collaboration is essential for future research.

Indexed as

Clinical CompetenceGesturesMinimally Invasive Surgical ProceduresSurgeonsArtificial IntelligenceHumansArtificial intelligenceAssessmentMinimally invasive surgeryPatient outcomesSimulationSurgical gesturesSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID40739419

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.