ArticleBMC surgery2025
Patient-specific virtual surgical simulation: the preliminary exploration of surgical evaluation for difficult pediatric liver tumors.
Article in BMC surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe surgical evaluation of pediatric liver tumors is challenging, especially in difficult cases that require precise surgery. Three-dimensional visualization (3D) based on two-dimensional CT (2D) has been widely used. However, virtual surgical simulation (VS), which can provide more procedural details for specific patients, is worthy of further exploration.
methodsSix pediatric liver tumor patients with the surgical difficulty increasing sequentially were selected. Recruited pediatric surgeons (15 junior and 15 senior) guided professional technicians in performing surgical evaluation using 2D, 3D, and VS sequentially. The patient-specific VS based on 3D can be constructed within the clinically permissible time window to meet clinical needs.
resultsFor objective analysis, the scores in 3D Group and VS Group were significantly higher than those in 2D Group (P < 0.0001), and there was also a statistically significant difference between 3D Group and VS Group (P < 0.0001). As the difficulty increased, the 3D Group and VS Group consistently maintained higher scores. The scores of Junior Group using 2D were significantly lower than those of Senior Group (P < 0.0001), but there was no significant statistical difference in the scores of using 3D and VS. For subjective assessment, the scores of 3D Group and VS Group were significantly higher than those of 2D Group (P < 0.0001). VS was more aligned with clinical reality compared to 3D.
conclusion3D and VS offer significant advantages in surgical evaluation compared with 2D, particularly for difficult cases and junior surgeons. The novel perspective and realistic experience provided by VS have attracted attention, and future research will further validate its potential clinical value in preoperative rehearsals and advanced training.
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.