ArticleScientific reports2025
A fine-tuned foundational model SurgiSAM2 for surgical video anatomy segmentation and detection.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Computer vision augmented indocyanine green near-infrared fluorescence (ICG-NIRF) signal-to-background ratio (SBR) for identification of extrahepatic biliary structures in laparoscopic cholecystectomy.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Foundation models in medical image analysis: A systematic review and quantitative analysis.Medical image analysis · 2026Review
- Artificial intelligence-supported segmentation of cardiac anatomy in open-heart surgery videos.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Fine-Grained Perception for Fundus and Prostate Medical Image Segmentation.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- SASVi: segment any surgical video.International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery · 2025Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The foundational segmentation models, segmenting anything model (SAM) and SAM 2, have transformed segmentation by enabling remarkable zero-shot performance across diverse domains. In this study, we evaluate SAM 2 for surgical scene understanding by examining its semantic segmentation capabilities for organs/tissues both in zero-shot scenarios and after fine-tuning. We utilized five public datasets to evaluate and fine-tune SAM 2 for segmenting anatomical tissues in surgical videos/images. Fine-tuning was applied to the image encoder and mask decoder. We limited training subsets from 50 to 400 samples per class to better model real-world constraints with data acquisition. The impact of dataset size on fine-tuning performance was evaluated with weighted mean dice coefficient (WMDC), and the results were also compared against previously reported state-of-the-art (SOTA) results. SurgiSAM 2, a fine-tuned SAM 2 model, demonstrated significant improvements in segmentation performance, achieving a 17.9% relative WMDC gain compared to the baseline SAM 2. Increasing prompt points from 1 to 10 and training data scale from 50/class to 400/class enhanced performance; the best WMDC of 0.92 on the validation subset was achieved with 10 prompt points and 400 samples per class. On the test subset, this model outperformed prior SOTA methods in 24/30 (80%) of the classes with a WMDC of 0.91 using 10-point prompts. Notably, SurgiSAM 2 generalized effectively to unseen organ classes, achieving SOTA on 7/9 (77.8%) of them. Heavily dissected tissues and similar appearing organs such as small and large intestines remained challenging. SAM 2 achieves remarkable zero-shot and fine-tuned performance for surgical scene segmentation, surpassing prior SOTA models across several organ classes of diverse datasets. This suggests immense potential for enabling automated/semi-automated annotation pipelines, thereby decreasing the burden of annotations facilitating several surgical applications.
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.