ReviewJPRAS open2025
Artificial intelligence in microsurgery and supermicrosurgery training within plastic surgery: A systematic review.
Review in JPRAS open, 2025. 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.
- Article
- [A brief discussion on microsurgery techniques and free perforator flaps for wound repair].Zhonghua shao shang yu chuang mian xiu fu za zhi · 2026Article
- Vision-Capable LLMs in Microsurgery: A Blinded Comparison of Two AI Models with Expert Microsurgeons in the Appraisal of 200 Experimental Anastomoses.Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence-enhanced microsurgical training: a systematic review.NPJ digital medicine · 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
Introduction: Artificial Intelligence (AI) is increasingly integrated into plastic surgery. Technical complexities of microsurgery and supermicrosurgery demand incorporation of AI in facilitating steep learning curves. Although simulation models exist, many provide inadequate preparation and fidelity. AI has potential to complement trainee efforts in skill acquisition by improving training efficacy. This systematic review aims to present and evaluate applications and future of AI in microsurgery and supermicrosurgery plastic surgery training. Materials and Methods: PubMed, Embase, Scopus and Google Scholar were searched following PRISMA guidelines. Studies on AI applications on microsurgery and supermicrosurgery training within plastic surgery were included. Two independent reviewers screened the literature, extracted data and assessed risk of bias using ROBINS-I tool. AI model architecture and motion, eye and instrument tracking parameters and narrative data synthesis were captured on Microsoft Excel. (PROSPERO ID: CRD42025607695). Results: Five articles were included. Two articles developed automated microsurgical skill classification datasets with force-based surgical glove model achieving above 95 % accuracy. Two AI applications used eye tracking parameters namely, blink rate, pupil dilation and gaze coordination to assess proficiency and workload. Path length, mean velocity and jerk curvature were accurately analyzed by AI models with instrument and hand tracking. All studies reported moderate risk of bias. Conclusion: This is the first systematic review addressing AI applications in microsurgery and supermicrosurgery training. AI models tracking eye, hand and instrument motion for microsurgical skill assessment demonstrated accuracy and precision, enabling real-time monitoring of proficiency and workload, which are scalable, objective methods for improving training and outcomes.
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.