ArticleInternational journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery2026
Benchmarking variability in semantic segmentation in minimally invasive abdominal surgery.
Article in International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery, 2026. 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeAnatomical identification during abdominal surgery is subjective given unclear boundaries of anatomical structures. Semantic segmentation of these structures relies on an accurate identification of the boundaries which carries an unknown uncertainty. Given its inherent subjectivity, it is important to assess annotation adequacy. This study aims to evaluate variability in anatomical structure identification and segmentation using MedSAM by surgical residents.
methodsImages from the Dresden Surgical Anatomy Dataset and the Endoscapes2023 Dataset were semantically annotated by a group of surgery residents using MedSAM in the following classes: abdominal wall, colon, liver, small bowel, spleen, stomach and gallbladder. Each class had 3 to 4 sets of annotations. Inter-annotator variability was assessed through DSC, ICC, BIoU and using the Simultaneous Truth and Performance Level Estimation algorithm to obtain a consensus mask and by calculating Fleiss' kappa agreement between all annotations and reference.
resultsThe study showed strong inter-annotator agreement among surgical residents, with DSC values of 0.84-0.95 and Fleiss' kappa between 0.85 and 0.91. Surface area reliability was good to excellent (ICC = 0.62-0.91), while boundary delineation showed lower reproducibility (BIoU = 0.092-0.157). STAPLE consensus masks confirmed consistent overall shape annotations despite variability in boundary precision.
conclusionThe study demonstrated low variability in the semantic segmentation of intraperitoneal organs in minimally invasive abdominal surgery, performed by surgical residents using MedSAM. While DSC and Fleiss' kappa values confirm strong inter-annotator agreement, the relatively low BIoU values point to challenges in boundary precision, especially for anatomically complex or variable structures. These results establish a benchmark for expanding annotation efforts to larger datasets and more detailed anatomical features.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41493532What 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.