ArticleEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2026
Benchmarking deep learning pipelines for surgical instrument segmentation in endoscopic spine surgery: cross-dataset evaluation under deployment-realistic conditions.
Article in European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeAutomated surgical instrument segmentation is a prerequisite for AI-assisted guidance in endoscopic spine surgery. Deployment-realistic comparisons of foundation-model and conventional deep learning architectures - accounting for the detector dependency of bbox-prompted models - remain lacking.
methodsSeven deep learning pipelines were evaluated for binary instrument segmentation: U-Net, Attention U-Net, U-Net++, SegFormer-B0, DeepLabV3+, nnU-Net, and a fully automatic two-stage foundation-model pipeline (MedSAM2-Tiny segmentor + YOLOv8-nano detector). Strict patient-level data splitting was applied across two independent datasets (SNUBH biportal, n = 56 patients; SEA uniportal, n = 60 patients) with three-tier testing (internal, temporal external, cross-dataset external) and two training variants (biportal-only; combined biportal-uniportal).
resultsWith biportal-only training, the fully automatic foundation-model pipeline ranked last on cross-dataset external testing (DSC 0.776; 0.737 under a strict empty-mask convention), about 9% points below DeepLabV3+ (0.865). The same MedSAM2-Tiny segmentor reached DSC 0.946 with ground-truth bounding-box prompts, leaving a 16.9-point oracle-to-deployment gap driven by detector domain mismatch: 61% missed detections and 39% box-localization error. With combined training, all seven pipelines exceeded DSC 0.94; nnU-Net was highest (0.978), and the foundation-model pipeline (0.962) was not significantly different from SegFormer-B0 (0.960) or DeepLabV3+ (0.958) after Bonferroni correction, although the small external sample does not establish equivalence. The improvement was driven primarily by detector rather than segmentor learning, and all seven main pipelines except the nnU-Net 5-fold ensemble met the 30 frames-per-second real-time threshold.
conclusionsFoundation-model two-stage pipeline performance depends critically on detector training data coverage; once the segmentor approaches its oracle ceiling, detector domain coverage becomes the limiting factor for fully automatic deployment. When combined training is feasible, foundation-model and conventional architectures converge to comparable accuracy, although these rankings are specific to the datasets studied and require validation on independent cohorts. Reporting deployment DSC alongside the ground-truth bounding-box upper bound is recommended for future surgical-segmentation benchmarks.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42481769What 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.