ArticleDigital health
Optimizing incision placement for maximum disc and endplate preparation in lumbar endo-fusion using parametric modeling, genetic algorithms, and machine learning.
Article in Digital health. 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To optimize incision placement for uniportal endoscopic lumbar fusion using computational methods to maximize disc and endplate preparation. Methods: We analyzed 605 axial lumbar MRI images from 121 patients in an institutional development cohort and 120 MRI images from 40 patients in an independent external validation cohort. A parametric MRI-based anatomical delineation system was developed to define the relevant surgical anatomy, and genetic algorithm optimization was used to determine optimal incision placement. Machine learning was then used to predict optimal incision positions from MRI-derived anatomical features, including disc morphology, Kambin's triangle width, dural sac width, and posterior longitudinal ligament-to-skin distance. Results: Genetic algorithm optimization identified level-specific optimal incision distances: 58.93 ± 10.19 mm (L1-2), 63.31 ± 9.84 mm (L2-3), 67.79 ± 12.82 mm (L3-4), 83.89 ± 13.69 mm (L4-5), and 95.28 ± 19.38 mm (L5-S1). Under a patient-level framework, the artificial neural network (ANN) showed the best performance in predicting the GA-derived optimal incision position from MRI-derived anatomical features (internal validation R Conclusion: A web-based computational planning tool was developed to optimize incision placement and maximize disc and endplate preparation in uniportal endoscopic lumbar fusion. This approach may support patient-specific preoperative planning.
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.